DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
TOR
Docket No: 7560-08
12 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 10 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.
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 1976 at age 18
and served without disciplinary incident until 14 December 1976,
when you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for two periods of
absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and
failure to obey a lawful order. About two months later, on 16
February 1977, you received your second NJP for absence from your
appointed place of duty.
On 16 and again on 23 January 1978 you received NUP for three
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order, absence from
your appointed place of duty, and breaking restriction. Shortly
thereafter on 28 March 1978, you were convicted by special court-
martial (SPCM) of assault and sentenced to a $200 forfeiture of
pay. You received your fifth NUP, on 18 May 1978, for absence
from your appointed place of duty. Two months later, on 14 July
1978, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a
three day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and four
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order.
Subsequently, 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). On
19 July 1978 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. On 21 August 1978 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 28 August 1978, you were so discharged and
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
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 and change your
reenlistment code so that you may reenlist and fulfill your
original contract with the Marine Corps. It also considered your
assertion that you were not advised of the characterization of
your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge or a change of your reenlistment code because of the
seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in five
NJPs and two court-martial convictions. Finally, you were
repeatedly advised and warned regarding deficiencies in your
performance and that failure to correct these deficiencies would
result in disciplinary action and administrative discharge. You
were also given an opportunity to defend yourself at an ADB and
possibly obtain a better characterization of service, but instead
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,
Wyo p0"
W. DEAN PF R
Executive D tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07523-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2008 | 06162-08
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. During the period 4 April to 10 August 1978, you were in a UA status, a period of about 128 days. On 15 August 1979, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00598-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10041 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 July 2012. 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 | CY2006 | 08988-06
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 27 December 1974 you enlistedin the Navy at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04042-11
On 11 January 1977 you received NUP for absence from your appointed place of duty and two specifications of failure to obey a lawful order. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of the narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your repeated and frequent misconduct which resulted in nine NUJPs, counselling on several occasions for involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00939-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken by civil authorities for this misconduct.
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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11679-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 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...