DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJIR
Docket No: 2032-08
7 January 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 6 January 2009. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 February 1982 and began a
period of active duty on 2 June 1982. On 12 August and again on
27 September 1982 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
failure to obey a lawful order and sleeping on post. About seven
months later, on 25 April 1983, you received your third NIP for
failure to obey a lawful order. Shortly thereafter, on 30 July
1983 you were indicted by foreign civil authorities on a drug
charge. As a result, on 21 December 1983, you were convicted by
Civil authorities of violation of the Japanese Narcotic Control
Law and sentenced to confinement for eight months. Nonetheless,
the confinement was suspended for three years.
On 9 January 1984 you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to the civil conviction.
At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel
and to present your case to an administrative discharge board
(ADB). Your commanding officer recommended discharge under other
than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil
conviction. On 17 January 1984 the discharge authority approved
this recommendation, and on 6 February 1984 you were so
discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your misconduct in a foreign civilian community and repetitive
misconduct in the Marine Corps which resulted in three NUJPs.
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,
W. DEAN I R
Executive or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04264-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2009. Shortly thereafter, you received the following NJP’s: on 16 July 1982, for carrying a concealed weapon and sleeping on post; on 12 December 1982, for UA and failure to obey a lawful order; and on 8 February 1983, for UA and failure to obey a lawful order. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03322-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3 August 1983, your record Although your record further reflects that you were an unauthorized absentee from 18 to 20 October 1983, a period of two days, it does not indicate if disciplinary action was taken. However,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04254-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 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 18 October 1983, you had NUP for use of marijuana.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01915-10
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 these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your four NUP’s, UA's totaling over six months, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06827-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 28 October 1981 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18. On that same date, you were separated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11984-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 10 August 2011. The sentence imposed wag confinement for 45 days, a forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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 | 08040-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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 | CY2009 | 00125-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00573-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2007. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04242-09
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 23 August 1983, the separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. Finally, members of the armed services who are subject to conviction by civil authorities and, if convicted, are discharged.