DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BC 20370-5190 .
TUIR
Docket No: 7443-08
4 June 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 2 June 2009. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request, 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.
4
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 15 April 1977 at age 18. You
served for a year and two months without disciplinary incident, |
but during the period from 8 June to 24 August 1978 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions for absence from
your appointed place of duty, a four day period of unauthorized
absence (UA), and disobedience.
During the period from 24 January to 29 March 1979 you received
NJP on three more occasions for two specifications of failure to
obey a lawful order, disobedience, and disrespect. On 11 June
1979 you were-convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of
disobedience and sentenced to a $150 forfeiture of pay and
restriction for 14 days.
On 22 June 1979 you were notified of pending administrative
Separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of
a discreditable nature with military authorities. At that time
you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
You did, however, submit a statement explaining the reason for
your numerous NJPs. On 25 June 1979 your commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities.
Your record reflects that during the period from 10 March 1978 to
2 July 1979 you were repeatedly counselled, in part, regarding
your poor driving ability, unsafe driving habits, exceeding
posted speed limits, poor attitude and personal appearance,
unsatisfactory performance, nonrecommendation for promotion, and
deficiencies in military bearing, dependability, initiative,
judgment, personal appearance, and endurance.
On 2 July 1979 the discharge authority approved the foregoing
. recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you
an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on
6 July 1979, 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. It also.
considered your assertion that you believed you were discharged
due to pseudofolliculitis barbae. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in six NUJPs and a
SCM. Finally, you were repeatedly advised and warned regarding
deficiencies in your performance. You were also given an
opportunity to defend yourself at an ADB and possibly obtain a
better characterization of service. Nonetheless, you waived your
procedural right to present your case to an ADB. Accordingly,
your application has been denied.
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, \
Weed
W. DEAN P R
Executive Biredtor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07560-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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 | CY2007 | 01905-07
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 9 July 1976, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. On 1 May 1979, in connection with the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04932 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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. 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 | CY2007 | 11345-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07289-09
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07289-09
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03068-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 23 July 1981 you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04701-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 2011. 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 | CY2003 | 09005-03
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 submit ed was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted fi he Mar~i~ ~ro~ps u ~1 WIy ±9~ aL d~O ~1. Your request was denied and on 20 October...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06151-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. 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 served without disciplinary incident until 6 July 1978, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of...