Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00634-08
Original file (00634-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 634-08
5 September 2008

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 September 2008. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of
this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board
consisted of your application, together with all material
submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable

statutes, regulations and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material

error or injustice.

On 4 November 1980, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19.
On 23 February and 23 June 1982, you had nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for willful disobedience of a lawful order, disrespect,
being intoxicated while on duty, and failure to go to your
appointed place of duty. On 15 September 1982, a service
record entry stated that your urinalysis tested positive for
Marijuana. On 23 September 1982, another service record entry
stated that your urinalysis confirmation sample was lost and
you were placed on the urinalysis surveillance program. On

12 October 1982, you were counseled regarding abuse of alcohol
and placed on an antabuse regime. On 22 October 1982, you had

NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty. On
21 February 1983, you were counseled regarding deficiencies in

your performance and conduct and warned that further
infractions could result in disciplinary action or
administrative separation. On 8 and 29 March 1983, you had NJP

for five instances of absence from your appointed place of
duty.

Based on the information currently contained in the record, it
appears that your commanding officer subsequently initiated
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct. In connection with this processing, you
would have acknowledged that separation could result in an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge and it appears that you
waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB). Apparently, the separation authority
approved the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH
discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. On 13 May 1983, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
The Board also considered your belief that you received a
general discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct
that continued even after you were warned that further
infractions could result in administrative separation.
Furthermore, there is no evidence in the record to support your
belief that you received a general discharge. The Board also
noted that waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB,
your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable
characterization of service. Therefore, the Board concluded
that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is
warranted. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished

upon request.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to
have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered
by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind
that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an
official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to

demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

Sincerely,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01911-08

    Original file (01911-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and your belief were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10122-07

    Original file (10122-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. During the period 12 November 1982 to 18 February 1983, you had three NUP's. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00537 12

    Original file (00537 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01913-08

    Original file (01913-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02177-08

    Original file (02177-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 October 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 10 May 1985, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02669-08

    Original file (02669-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 6 November 1984, you were discharged with an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00440-08

    Original file (00440-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that continued even after...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04028-12

    Original file (04028-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04935-08

    Original file (04935-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07239-08

    Original file (07239-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 8 April 1983, you were counseled regarding your unsatisfactory performance and conduct, advised that the command would assist you with alcohol...