Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11280-10
Original file (11280-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TJR ;
Docket No: 11280-16.
4 August 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 2 August 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 Marine Corps on 13 August 1968 at age 17 and
served for about seven months without disciplinary incident.
However, during the period from 4 March to 15 July 1969, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions and were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM). Your offenses were two
periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling two days, service
discrediting conduct, and theft of a radio valued at $45.

During the period from lz February to 7 December 1970, while
serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), you were convicted
twice by SCM and received two more NIPs. Your offenses included
sleeping on post in a hostile fire area, leaving post without
being properly relieved, sitting down on post, and an unspecified
offense. On 18 February 1971, you were convicted by civil
authorities of failure to appear, participating in a speeding
contest, and not having air pollution control devices on your
vehicle. You were sentenced to serve three days in jail and a
$58.50 fine. Shortly thereafter, on 1 March 1971, you received
NIP for absence from your appointed place of duty.
On 19 April 1971 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of unfitness due to drug abuse and
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military and
civilian authorities. At that time you waived your right to
consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an-
administrative discharge board (ADB). Subsequently, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to drug abuse as
evidenced by your wrongful possession of marijuana and a
dangerous drug, specifically, amphetamines. On 3 May 19971 the
discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed
your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable
discharge by reason of unfitness due to drug abuse, and on 18 May
1971, 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, post service conduct, service in the RVN, 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 drug related
misconduct which resulted in five NJPs, two SCMs, and a civil
conviction. Further, 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,

W. DEAN PRBI R
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02638-10

    Original file (02638-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, who are discharged by reason of unfitness normally receive discharges...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10254-10

    Original file (10254-10.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 July 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 | CY2007 | 08013-07

    Original file (08013-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 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 | CY2013 | NR4883 13

    Original file (NR4883 13.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03696-10

    Original file (03696-10.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 February 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11286-10

    Original file (11286-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06130-10

    Original file (06130-10.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. On 25 September and 28 November 1972 your command received two letters of indebtedness resulting from your failure to pay just debts. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00754-11

    Original file (00754-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exiatence 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08507-10

    Original file (08507-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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 were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04701-10

    Original file (04701-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...