DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 10773-09
9 July 2010
Dear aM
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 8 July 2010. 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 9 July 1980, at age 17. On
31 May 1981, you commenced a period of unauthorized absence (UA)
for three days. On 22 April 1981, a mental health evaluation was
conducted and you were diagnosed with psychiatric problems, an
immature personality, and a situational adjustment to adulthood,
which showed a lack of motivation. On 15 June 1981, you were
evaluated again and you made the statement that you were still
unhappy with the Marine Corps and had since attempted suicide
twice by cutting your wrists. On 8 July 1981, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failing to obey a lawful order
by having possession of alcoholic beverages in the enlisted
quarters. On 4 December 1981, you received NJP for failure to
obey a lawful order and failure to go to your appointed place of
duty. After your second NUP, you were counseled and warned that
further misconduct could result in administrative separation.
Administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of
misconduct. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other
than honorable discharge. Your commanding officer concurred with
the ADB’s recommendation, and forwarded his recommendation that
you be discharged with other than honorable conditions by reason
of misconduct. However, your misconduct continued and on
11 February 1981, you were convicted by a special court-martial
(SPCM) for assault, willfully disobeying a lawful command, being
absent from your appointed place of duty and disobeying a lawful
regulation. You were sentenced to forfeitures of $900, and 60
days confinement at hard labor. On 1 April 1982, you received
your fourth NUP for being absent from your appointed place of
duty, and two incidents of disobeying a lawful order. Between
7 September and 20 September 1982, you were in a UA status. On
27 October 1982, you were convicted by your second SPCM for being
disrespectful toward a commissioned officer and a fellow Marine,
two incidents of disobeying a lawful order, sleeping on watch,
being UA, falsely altering your identification card, and
possession of marijuana and rolling papers. You were sentenced
to forfeitures of $1,400, four months confinement at hard labor
and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). You began two more periods of
UA totaling five days. You were placed on appellate leave on
27 December 1982. On 10 May 1983, after appellate review, you
were discharged with a BCD.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given your record of four NJP’s and convictions
by two SPCM’s. 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,
Lo ’
W. DEAN PFERF
Executive Dire ir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10658-10
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 20 October 1978, you received NIP for being UA for three 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 | CY2011 | 05649 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08019-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | 03814-07
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 3 January 1982 the discharge authority directed discharge under honorable conditions by reason of drug abuse. 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 | CY2009 | 02403-09
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 | CY2013 | NR4659 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2014. 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 3 April 1979, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two specifications of failing to go to your appointed place of duty,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00214-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 13 October 2011. On 13 December 1961, you received NUP for three incidents of failure to go to your appointed place of duty. - 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 | CY2010 | 10690-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08188-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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...