DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 6151-10
8 April 2011
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 5 April 2011. 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 Navy on 29 July 1977 at age 17 and began a
period of active duty on 7 October 1977. You served without
disciplinary incident until 6 July 1978, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed
place of duty and dereliction of duty. On 4 November 1978 you
received NUP for absence from your appointed place of auty:
Shortly thereafter, on 31 January 1979, you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of absence from your
appointed place of duty and two specifications of breaking
restriction, and were sentenced to hard labor for 30 days. On 5
November 1979 you received your third NIP for destruction of
government property and reckless driving.
Your record reflects that during the period from 24 February to 6
March 1980 you were apprehended and held in custody after being
charged with assault on your wife, destruction of government
property, communicating a threat to your wife, and failure to
obey a lawful order as evidenced by your failure to clean up
after your pets and allowing unsanitary conditions to exist in
government quarters. On 13 March 1980 you received NUP for
assault, communicating a threat, and failure to obey a lawful
order. The punishment imposed was a restriction and extra duty
for 30 days and a reduction in paygrade.
nt21 March 1980 you were notified of pending administrative
Separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military and civilian
authorities. After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
However, in an agreement with your commanding officer for a
recommendation of a discharge under honorable conditions, you
waived your right to an ADB. Subsequently, your commanding
officer recommended discharge under honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military and civilian authorities. On
9 May 1980 the discharge authority approved this recommendation
and directed your commanding officer to issue you a general
discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 16 May 1980, 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 of having an undiagnosed mental
jllness, specifically, a bi-polar manic depression mood disorder,
which may have been the cause for your repeated disciplinary
problems. 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 NUPs, a SCM, and discredit to the Navy.
Finally, Sailors with an extensive record of misconduct, such as
yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable
conditions. In this regard, the Board concluded that you were
fortunate to have had an agreement with your commanding officer
in which you received a general discharge. 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 imiustLee .
Sincerely,
\y
DEAN 'PFRI
Executive Dir 1
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01198-04
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. On 8 November 1980 you were again notified of administrative separation processing by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, and you waived all of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00142-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2003. On 16 October 1980 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. 2 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 | CY2012 | 04128-12
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. In February 1980 you were advised that administrative separation action had been initiated by reason of misconduct, but held in abeyance pending a medical evaluation for alcohol abuse. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $598 forfeiture of pay, and a...
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 | CY2006 | 01113-07
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 1 December 1977 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until 8...
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 | CY2013 | NR8945 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03331-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. Your offenses were two specifications of disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, two periods of UA totalling two days, assault, and two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02317-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. You served without disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated...
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.