DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 7936-08
7 May 2009
on ee
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 7 May 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 medical and naval records, applicable
statutes, regulations and policies. :
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you had a prior period
of honorable service in the Marine Corps from 30 June 1982 to
20 December 1985. On 21 December 1985, you reenlisted in the
Marine Corps. On 18 March 1988, you were notified of pending
administrative separation processing for an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge for commission of a serious offense (having sex
with a 15 year old female). You waived all of your rights,
including your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 5 April 1988, your commanding officer’s recommendation for an
OV discharge for commini:ion of a serious offence (having sex
with a 15 year old female). You received an adverse fitness
report, which noted your commission of a serious offense (two
counts of sexual conduct with a minor (15 years of age)), a
class 6 felony. On 13 April 1988, you received the OTH
discharge for misconduct for commission of a serious offense,
and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
considered all potential mitigation, such as your prior period
of honorable service and contention that your discharge would be
automatically upgraded to honorable after three years. However,
the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterizing your OTH discharge because of your
commission of very serious misconduct. You are advised that no
discharge is automatically upgraded after the passage of time.
The Board also noted that you waived your right to an ADB, your
best opportunity for retention or a better characterization of
service. In view of the above, 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06046-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10195-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 2011. Your commanding officer agreed with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and on 4 March 2010, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service due to misconduct {COSO) , and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05213-06
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. Furthermore, concerning your contention that you only had one offense, the record shows that you had one civil conviction and an NJP for two offenses. The Board also noted that you could have been discharged by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04634-10
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 the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in six NUPs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11330-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all, material gubmitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. As a result of the NIS investigation, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of five specifications of indecent assault against female Marines, peeping through a window of a Female Marine, looking into the bathroom of a female Marine, and unlocking a bathroom door and peeping...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05965-08
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 that 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05187-08
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 | 02049-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2009. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12365-08
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 23 March 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | 08460-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 May 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...