Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06330-06
Original file (06330-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO


 TJR
Docket No: 6330-06
16 March 2007





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 13 March 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 sub m itted support thereof our naval re c ord 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 23 September 1987 at age 21 and served without disciplinary incident until 16 May 1988, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 13 day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and disobedience. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-2 and correctional custody for 30 days. Shortly thereafter, on 1 July 1988, you received NJP for a four day period of UA and were awarded reduction to paygrade E-1, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, and a $335 forfeiture of pay.
On 5 July 1988 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After consulting with legal counsel elected to waive your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 15 July 1988 you were counselled regarding deficiencies in your performance, specifically, writing bad checks and failing to maintain sufficient funds.
On 15 August 1988, after breaking restriction, you began another period of UA and remained in that status until 12 September 1988, a period of 29 days. While in this UA status, your commanding officer recommended a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 25 August 1988 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions. On 19 September 1988 you received an other than honorable discharge.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and assertion that you were ill-advised by a recruiter. 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 three NJP5 and included a lengthy period of UA. Further, there is no evidence in the record, and you have submitted none, to support your assertion of recruiter misconduct. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The nam e s an d vot e s of the members ef fort the pan e l 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
        

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11189-06

    Original file (11189-06.rtf) 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.You reenlisted in the Navy on 20 April 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. On 11 March...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05575-06

    Original file (05575-06.rtf) 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.You reenlisted in the Navy on 7 July 1989 after four years of prior honorable service. You served...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11133-06

    Original file (11133-06.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 18 September 1986 at age 27 and served for nearly two years...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00610-05

    Original file (00610-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2005. 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 | 03627-10

    Original file (03627-10.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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07698-07

    Original file (07698-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 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 | CY2008 | 05187-08

    Original file (05187-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2009. 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 continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 6 May 1988, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a four day period...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05240-08

    Original file (05240-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2009. 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 | CY2005 | 00592-05

    Original file (00592-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. 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 | CY2006 | 11064-06

    Original file (11064-06.rtf) 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.You reenlisted in the Navy on 12 September 1986 after four years of prior honorable service. As a...