Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08015-07
Original file (08015-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TUR
Docket No: 8015-07

3 October 2008

 

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 1 October 2008. 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 12 August 1985 at age 18 and
served without disciplinary incident until 2 January 1986, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was extra duty
and restriction for seven days and a $75 forfeiture of pay.

On 10 July 1987 you were convicted by civil authorities of
indecent exposure and sentenced to confinement for seven days.
On 8 December 1987 you received NIP for disrespect and two
specifications of disobedience. About three months later, on 3
March 1988, you were convicted by civil authorities of making a
false police report and sentenced to a $141 fine.

Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative discharge
under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due
to a pattern of misconduct, and on 25 March 1988, 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 and assertion that you are now making a better life
for yourself. It also considered your desire to upgrade your
discharge so that you may obtain employment. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive
misconduct in both the military and civilian communities.
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,

\WraSde

W. DEAN PFEI E
Executive Dilract

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02605-08

    Original file (02605-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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 | CY2014 | NR2163 14

    Original file (NR2163 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the -Board for Correction of Naval Records; sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2015. 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your post service...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10651-10

    Original file (10651-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02574-09

    Original file (02574-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09

    Original file (02392-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered 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 23 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03833-10

    Original file (03833-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12075-09

    Original file (12075-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 13 December 1989, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03967-08

    Original file (03967-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. You waived your right to consult with counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | 00279-10

    Original file (00279-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 03170-09

    Original file (03170-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...