DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
RDZ:ecb
Docket No. 11243-08
'F December 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 panei of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 December 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
Your record shows that during the period from June 1987 to
October 1991 you received nonjudicial punishment on five
occasions. Your offenses were willful disobedience of an order
from a commissioned officer, wiliful disobedience of an order of
a noncommissioned officer on two occasions, fraudulently issuing
bad checks on five occasions and being disrespectful in language
to a senior noncommissioned officer. As a result of your
frequent acts of misconduct your commanding officer recommended
that you be administratively separated with an other than
honorable discharge {OTH). After being informed of your right
to appear before an administrative discharge board, where you
would be represented by a military lawyer and where you could
request retention or a better discharge, you opted to waive your
rights and accept an OTH. You were so discharged on 3 January
1992. In accordance with Marine Corps regulations you were
issued on RE-4 reenlistment code.
In its review of your application the Board concluded that in
light of your extensive disciplinary record both your discharge
and reenlistment code were properly issued and should not be
changed now as a matter of clemency.
‘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 P
Executive D tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06017-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2009. Unfortunately you only served for a little less than one year and three months and were separated with an other than honorable discharge (OTH) due to frequent disciplinary actions. 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 | 07721-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 2010. Unfortunately you only served a little less than two years and seven months and you were discharged with an other than honorable discharge (OTH) due to 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 injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00063-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 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 | CY2013 | NR8945 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 07215 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 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. 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 | CY2012 | 03979-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2013. 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 6 April 1984, your case was heard by the ADB and by a unanimous vote of 3-0 you were recommended for administrative separation with an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02678-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. 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 | 01146-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2011. You were then notified that your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service discharge due to 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03403-08
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 and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3860-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval _ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ; application on 19 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...