Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09953-07
Original file (09953-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SIN
Docket No: 09953-07
5 February 2009

  

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, gitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 February 2009. 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 and began a period of active
duty on 25 June 1980 at age 17. During the period from

5 December 1980 to 19 May 1983, you received five nonjudicial
punishments (NJP’s) for a brief unauthorized absence (UA),
absence from your appointed place of duty, two instances of
dereliction of duty, disobedience, and a breach of the peace.
Additionally, you were counseled and warned that £UFENSE
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

On 29 August 1983, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. You waived your right to consult with counsel,
submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative

discharge board (ADB). Your case was forwarded with the
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct. On 1 September 1983, you

received a sixth NUP for 15 days of UA and larceny. On 26
September 1983, the discharge authority directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. On 14 October 1983
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 six NUJP’s, two of which
were imposed after you were counseled and warned concerning the
consequences of further misconduct. Further, you waived the
right to an ADB, your best chance for retention or a better
characterization of service. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06961-09

    Original file (06961-09.pdf) 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. On 2 June 1983, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct. The Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a discharge under other than honorable conditions is often directed when a Sailor is discharged for misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00936 12

    Original file (00936 12.pdf) 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. On 7 and 10 January 1983, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00704-08

    Original file (00704-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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 | CY2006 | 03588-06

    Original file (03588-06.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 31 July 1979 at age 17. However, on 4 and 13 January 1983 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02414-09

    Original file (02414-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. On 8 October 1983, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08019-08

    Original file (08019-08.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 June 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 | CY2006 | 05227-06

    Original file (05227-06.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.On 19 May 1980 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 26...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08510-07

    Original file (08510-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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 | CY2011 | 03090-11

    Original file (03090-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2012. 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 discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08109-06

    Original file (08109-06.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 Navy on 22 May 1980 at age 18. on 11 June and 10 December 1981 you received...