DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100

SMW
Docket No: 2322-07
1 November 2007

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 24 October 2007. 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 25 April 1988, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. On 19 September 1988, you had nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for urinating on a rack and in a squad bay. On 10 February 1989, you were counseled regarding writing worthless checks that totaled $684.00, and warned that further deficiencies could result in disciplinary action or administrative separation. You responded by submitting a statement in which you explained that you had worthless checks because you went by your leave and earnings statement instead of the bank statement. On 2 March 1989, you had NJP for writing worthless checks that totaled $851.00. During the period 11 May to 13 September 1989, you were counseled on three occasions regarding bad checks, failure to conform to weight standards, and poor judgment. On 13 September 1989, you had NJP for damaging government property, specifically, punching a hole in the wall.

On 28 November 1989, you failed to comply with permanent change of
station orders and began a period of unauthorized absence (UA)
that ended on 23 December 1989, a period of about 25 days. On
19 January 1990, you received a psychiatric consultation during
which you stated that personal problems attributed to the UA. On
3 February 1990, a substance abuse evaluation diagnosed you as
alcohol dependent and recommended residential treatment. On
10 May 1990, you were convicted by a summary court-martial of the
25 day period of UA and failure to go to your appointed place of
duty. During the period 28 May to 15 July 1990, you received
residential alcohol rehabilitation treatment. During the period
13 December 1990 to 23 May 1991, you participated in operations
Desert Shield and Desert Storm. On 19 August 1991, you had NJP
for a two day period of UA.

On 25 September 1991, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable (0TH) discharge and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
11 December 1991, a medical evaluation stated that you exceeded weight standards. On 13 January 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed an 0TH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 27 January 1992, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and participation in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The Board also considered your contentions that you were discharged about two months before your expiration of active service and the Marine Corps had been trying to discharge you for failure to meet weight standards. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Regarding your contentions, administrative separation by reason of misconduct may be initiated at any time during a Marine’s enlistment, and Marines who fail to meet weight standards may also be processed for separation, but it appears that your command never initiated separation based on you failure to meet weight standards. 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,

								W. DEAN PFEIFFER
								Executive Director