Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10259-07
Original file (10259-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS. -

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMW
Docket No: 10259-07
14 July 2008

 

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 9 July 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.

On 22 June 1983, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17
with parental consent. On 2 July and 6 November 1984, you

had nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for dereliction in the
performance of your duties, a brief instance of unauthorized
absence, and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.

On 20 December 1984, you were counseled regarding deficiencies
in your performance and conduct and warned that further
infractions could result in disciplinary action or
administrative separation. During the period 28 December 1984
to 10 October 1985, you had two NUP's and were convicted by a
special court-martial. Your offenses included two instances of
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, making a false
official statement, wrongful appropriation of a fan, and
disobedience of a lawful order. On 28 October 1985, you were
counseled regarding an alcohol related incident and warned that
minor disciplinary infractions. In connection with this
processing, you acknowledged that separation could result

in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge and elected to have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

On 19 November 1985, you had NUP for driving without a license.
On 17 January 1986, an ADB found that you were guilty of
misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions and
recommended a general discharge. On 28 March 1986, the
separation authority approved the discharge recommendation and
directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to
minor disciplinary infractions. On 11 April 1986, 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 contention that a thorough investigation
was not conducted prior to your court-martial which, if
conducted, would have revealed misconduct by other Marines at
your command. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that
continued after you were warned that further infractions could
result in administrative separation. Furthermore, there is no
evidence in the record to Support your contention. But, even if
there were such evidence, that would not excuse your misconduct.
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,

   

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06540-08

    Original file (06540-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02177-08

    Original file (02177-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. On 10 May 1985, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04581-08

    Original file (04581-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00657-07

    Original file (00657-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2007. 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 were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason for discharge, reenlistment code or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04060-08

    Original file (04060-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and waived the right to have your case heard...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00415-07

    Original file (00415-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel’ of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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 20 April 1987 you were counseled regarding your continued failure to be at your appointed place of duty on time, and warned that failure to take...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10625-06

    Original file (10625-06.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 6 September 1984 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. On 9 July 1985 you were counseled...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03780-08

    Original file (03780-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03355-09

    Original file (03355-09.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 8 September 1986, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04802-06

    Original file (04802-06.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 31 October 1980 at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On...