DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX TRG
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 4353-08
6 February 2009
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 February 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. .
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 6 February 1979 at age 18.
During the period from 11 December 1979 to 4 May 1981 you
received nonjudicial punishment on five occasions. Your offenses
were three instances of disobedience, disrespect and multiple
absences from your appointed place of duty. The record shows
that you had back problems and at one point were placed on six
months limited duty. However, your last two disciplinary actions
occurred after your return to full duty.
Based on the foregoing record of misconduct you were processed
for discharge by reason of misconduct. Although your record is
incomplete it appears that you elected to waive the right to have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board.
Subsequently the separation authority directed discharge under
other than honorable conditions and you were separated on 25 June
1981. ,
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, possible
ongoing problems with your back and contention that you were not
properly advised of the possible adverse consequences of a
discharge under other than honorable conditions. The Board Found
that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your record of
misconduct. 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,
Vo Qoae
W. DEAN PFET
Executive Di tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08262-00
A three—member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2001. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NJPs and special court—martial conviction, and the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for two prolonged periods of UA totalling nearly a year. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03762-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. During the period from 28 March to 23 December 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for a five day period of unauthorized absence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00433-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2001. 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. discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02433-02
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 and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequent misconduct and the lengthy period of UA which resulted in your request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01042-01
Prior to submitting this On 27 January 1983, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) denied your request for an upgrade of your discharge. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of an NJP and the fact you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for more than nine months of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07199-98
A three-member panel of the Board.for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. The punishment imposed was restriction for 30 On 23 November 1977 you received NJP paygrade E-3 and Your record further reflects that during the period from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07268-07
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 15 September 1977, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17. On 17 October 1982, you began another UA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10873-07
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 19 June 1980, you were convicted by a SPCM of the two instances of UA totaling 71 days. 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 | CY2003 | 01604-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2003. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03556 12
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. Therefore, in May 1981, you received an ADB and it voted to separate you with an OTH discharge due to misconduct. 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.