DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 6614-08
19 March 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 18 March 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
On 31 July 1978, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age
19 with an enlistment guarantee to be assigned in the aviation
maintenance field. On 18 November 1978, you reported to the
Aviation Machinist Mate School for duty as a student. On
28 February 1979, you had nonjudicial punishment for two
periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling about 22 days.
On 13 March 1979, you were counseled regarding your military
appearance and bearing, performance of duty, and language in
school. On 20 March 1979, you received a psychiatric
evaluation during which you stated that you went UA because you
could not adjust and you did not like being given orders. The
evaluation found that you had a passive dependent personality.
On 2 April 1979, you began another period of UA and were
dropped from the Aviation Machinist Mate School the next day
due to your UA's. On 18 February 1980, you surrendered, after
being UA for about 322 days. On 31 March 1980, you were
convicted by a special court-martial of the 322 day period of
UA. Your sentence included confinement at hard labor,
forfeitures of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After
the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on 6 March 1981,
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 contention that you had an
enlistment guarantee to be assigned in the air traffic control
field and your contract was not honored. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the
seriousness of your misconduct, specifically, more than 11
months of total UA. Regarding your contention, the record
shows that the Marine Corps honored your enlistment guarantee
to allow you to serve in the aviation maintenance field, but it
was terminated because of your repetitive misconduct.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03221-01
The Board also noted your contention that you were told by your recruiter that you could be an engineman, but you were actually assigned for training as a boiler technician. Board concluded that the foregoing factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial The Board believed that for a UA of more than three months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05971-01
The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) denied your request for recharacterization of your discharge on 4 September 1985. court-martialed on your 21st birthday to make an example out of you, the discharge was unjust, and that your pay record was lost from 1978 to 1979. foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of four NJPs and a special court-martial conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07621-00
opinion furnished by BUPERS memorandum 5420 Ser Pers 402 of 3 1 January 2001, a copy of which is attached. 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. was approved for Star re- “C” school sometime during that 8 March 1996 SNM requested and was granted an OTEIP extension On USS Dubuque.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06128-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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 | 05804-08
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 1 February 1979, you were warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10573-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2009. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and the passage of time. 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 | CY2006 | 07820-06
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 18 August 1976 at age 18. During this period of UA, you were convicted by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00200-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2009. You were recommended for administrative separation due to a pattern of misconduct, and you exercised your right to request an administrative discharge board (ADB). records.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10629-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2009. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07486-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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...