Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08019-08
Original file (08019-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 8019-08
24 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 17 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 21 March 1980 at age 18 and
began a period of active duty on 31 March 1980. About a year
later, on 4 March 1981, you received nonjudicial punishment (NIP)
for absence from your appointed place of duty, overindulgence in
liguor and drugs, and being incapacitated for duty.

On 19 January and 13 April 1982 you received NUP for absence from
your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and a one day period
of unauthorized absence (UA). On 5 October 1982 you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of
failure to go to your appointed place of duty and two periods of
UA totalling 114 days. You were sentenced to confinement at hard
labor for 70 days, a $300 forfeiture of pay, and reduction to
paygrade E-1. ,
On 23 March 1983 you received your fourth NJP for a one day
period of UA. Subsequently, you were processed for an
administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct. After waiving your right to consult with
legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB), the discharge authority directed your
commanding officer.to issue you an other than honorable discharge
by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and on 13
May 1983, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, »
carefully weighed ail potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, 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 repetitive misconduct which
resulted in four NUOPs and a SPCM. Finally, you were given an
opportunity to defend yourself, but 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,

Lo Wee,
W. DEAN PF R
Executive regétor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08109-06

    Original file (08109-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 22 May 1980 at age 18. on 11 June and 10 December 1981 you received...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03090-11

    Original file (03090-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08041-08

    Original file (08041-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 00704-08

    Original file (00704-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. 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 | 07570-07

    Original file (07570-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 28 January 1980 at age 18. During the period from 27 August 1982 to 1...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01892-09

    Original file (01892-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 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 25 August 1984, the separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02403-09

    Original file (02403-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. 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 | 02811-07

    Original file (02811-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, period of service without disciplinary incident, time served in Beirut, post service conduct, and the passage of time. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03764-01

    Original file (03764-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and 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& appointed place of duty On 25 October 1983 vou received was On 15 November 1983 the BCD was to be executed, Subsequently, the suspension of the forfeitures and BCD were vacated. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden‘is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10773-09

    Original file (10773-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2010. 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other than honorable discharge.