DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B ARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-~1OO

							

											SMW
											Docket No: 6827-06
											30 November 2006

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 2 November 2006. 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.

On 28 October 1981 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18. You served without incident until 15 December 1982, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disobedience of a lawful order. On that same date you were counseled regarding frequent discreditable involvement and warned that further infractions could result in administrative separation or disciplinary action. On 16 December 1982 you were counseled regarding two civil convictions for driving while intoxicated (DWI). On 25 January 1983 you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order. On 21 March 1983 you were convicted by civil court of assault with a deadly weapon, and sentenced to confinement. On 22 March 1983 you received NJP for an unauthorized absence (UA) of about 20 days.

Although the record is incomplete, it shows that on 23 March 1983 your commanding Qfficer initiated administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. In connection with this processing, you would have been advised that separation could result in an other than honorable discharge. It also appears that after you were advised, you waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 8 April 1983 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. On 11 April 1983 you received NJP for disrespect and use of provoking words or gestures. On that same date, you were separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth. The Board also considered your version of events concerning the circumstances that led to your discharge, and the contention that you used poor judgment because of abuse of alcohol. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discourage due to the repetitive misconduct that continued even after you were warned that further infractions could result in administrative separation or disciplinary action. Furthermore, abuse of alcohol does not excuse misconduct. Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to have your case heard by an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a more favorable characterization of service. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

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,

2