DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
CRS
Docket No: 10041-11
8 November 2012
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 11 July 2012. 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 and began active duty on 5
August 1976. On 11 August 1977, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for having possession of marijuana. On 21
February 1978, you received NUP for failure to obey a lawful
order, and being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for one
day. On 21 June 1978, you received NUP for being absent from
your appointed place of duty. On 11 September 1978, you
received NUP for failure to obey a lawful order. On 8 February
1979, you received NJP for being UA for 15 days. Administrative
separation action was then initiated by reason of misconduct.
You waived your right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 8 March 1979, your
commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged under OTH conditions by reason of misconduct due to
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities. The discharge authority directed an OTH discharge
by reason of misconduct. On 15 June 1979, you received an OTH
discharge for misconduct (frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature). At that time you were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct,
and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the
characterization of your discharge, given your record of five
NJP’s for misconduct. You are advised that an RE-4 reenlistment
code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct
and is not recommended for retention. 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,
DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
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 | CY2011 | 11864 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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 | 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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06151-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 served without disciplinary incident until 6 July 1978, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04382-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the preceedings 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06982-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your separation code due to your frequent 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 | CY2012 | 00256 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 October 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and 4s not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08590-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval and health records, applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 3 August 1984, you were counseled regarding UA and disobeying lawful orders, and warned that further misconduct could result in disciplinary action or administrative separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04156-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2012. On 5 July 1982 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 19 July 1982, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...