Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01911-08
Original file (01911-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 1911-08
17 October 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

16 October 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 8 June 1982, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17

with parental consent. During the period 16 March to

1 September 1983, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two
occasions and were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM). Your
offenses included disobedience of a lawful order, damaging government
property, and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. You
also had suspended punishment vacated for unspecified misconduct. On
1 September 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

14 September 1983, you had NUP for violation of a lawful order and
breaking restriction. You were also counseled regarding the NUP and
warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action
or administrative separation. On 11 October 1983, you were convicted
by a SCM of breaking restriction.

On 13 October 1983, your commanding officer initiated administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation
could result in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge and waived
the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB). On 29 December 1983, the separation authority approved
the discharge recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason
of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 10 January 1984,
you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and
desire for a better discharge. The Board also considered your belief
that your service would have been different if you had not been
assigned to barracks duty. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that
these factors and your belief 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. The Board
also noted that you 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,

\WuSe

W. DEAN PFE E
Executive Diltcdct

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08555-08

    Original file (08555-08.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 May 2009. 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 17 July 1985, you had NUP for another unspecified period of UA and were warned that further infractions could result in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05741-07

    Original file (05741-07.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 2008. On 15 January 1990, you began a UA that ended on 3 February 1990, a period of about 19 days. 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 counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and...

  • 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 | 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 | 08476-08

    Original file (08476-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 May 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. 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 | 05807-08

    Original file (05807-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02235-08

    Original file (02235-08.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • 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 | 00634-08

    Original file (00634-08.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. 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). Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • 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...