DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SUN
Docket No: 08877-07
29 September 2008
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 23 September 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 31 August 1989 at age 18.
During the period from 12 October 1990 to 5 May 1992 you received
three nonjudicial punishments (NUP’s) for dereliction of duty,
two instances of disobedience, disrespectful language, and
defacing government property. You also were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of failure to go to your appointed place of
duty, dereliction of duty, destruction of property, and
assaulting another Marine. Additionally, you were counseled and
warned that further misconduct could result in administrative
discharge action.
On 10 June 1992, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. You elected to consult with legal counsel and
subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).
Your commanding officer forwarded your case to the commanding
general recommending separation.
On 7 August 1992, an ADB unanimously found that you had committed
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions. Subsequently,
on 2 November 1992, the discharge authority directed an other
than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern
of misconduct. On 29 December 1992 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given your record of three NUP’s, one of which
was imposed after you were counseled and warned of the
consequences of further misconduct and conviction by SCM for very
serious offenses. 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 PPE
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03358-09
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 were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | CY2008 | 01911-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and your belief were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08810-07
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of two NUP’s, one of which was imposed after you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct, and conviction by SCM for period of UA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00934-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 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 | CY2008 | 07028-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. You waived your rights to consult 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 | CY2009 | 04571-09
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. On 31 July 1991, you received NUP for drunk and disorderly conduct. 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 | CY2009 | 00867-09
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. Additionally, after your second NJP, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | CY2013 | NR2687-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2014. 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. Additionally, you were counseled on more than one occasion regarding your misconduct, and warned that further misconduct could result...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10943-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...