DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 1765-10
3 November 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 ef 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 2 November 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Marine Corps on 18 June 1979. You received
nonjudicial punishment on four occasions and were convicted at
two summary courts-martial. Your offenses included breach of
the peace, willfully disobeying a lawful order, disrespect (two
specifications), unauthorized absence (two days), and absence
from your appointed place of duty (23 specifications). You
were notified that your commanding officer was recommending you
for administrative separation with an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge due to misconduct (frequent involvement)). You
waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to
an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 19 January 1982,
you received an OTH discharge due to misconduct (frequent
involvement), and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth,
allegation of racial problems, and post service good conduct.
The, Board concluded that your discharge should not be upgraded
due to your numerous acts of misconduct. Regarding your
allegation, the Board noted that there is no evidence in the
record to support it, and you provided no such evidence. You
Are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the
passage of time or post service good conduct. The Board found
that you waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a better characterization of service. In view of
the above, 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.
\ Soon.
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Direc
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00694-10
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. Consequently, when applying fora correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01315-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 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, whert applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08092-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2010. On 17 January 1977, you were notified of pending administrative Separation action for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to frequent involvement. 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 | 04288-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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 | 07097-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 March 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 06800-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your numerous acts of misconduct. 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 | 05566-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2011. You also had two additional periods of UA totaling 37 days for which no disciplinary action was taken. 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 | 09511-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 2010. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05759-10
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04237-09
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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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...