DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
. 2 NAVY ANNEX
. WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 3355-09
19 January .2010
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 5 January 2010. 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 16 July 1984 at age 18. On 12 April 1985, you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 38 day period of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 23 July 1985, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for UA from your appointed place of
duty. On 4 October 1985, you received NUP for violation of a
lawful regulation and damage to military property valued at
$50.00. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct
could result in administrative separation. On 25 March 1986, you
received NJP for two instances of UA from your appointed place of
duty and disobeying a lawful order. On 25 August 1986,
administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of.
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You waived your rights
to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by
an administrative discharge board {ADB). On 27 August 1986, your
commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. On 8
September 1986, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge
by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 19
September 1986 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 the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in one SPCM and three NUP’s, two of which were imposed
after you were counseled and warned of the consequences of
further misconduct. The Board noted that you waived the right to
an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Finally, no discharge is
automatically upgraded. due to the passage of time or an
individual’s good behavior after discharge. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04581-08
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 | CY2008 | 02177-08
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 | CY2009 | 06195-09
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 NUP, 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 | CY2009 | 04685-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 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 19 December 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit and dereliction of duty.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10658-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 | CY2009 | 00731-09
On 20 June 1988, you received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana and UA. Additionally, after your third NUP, you were counseled and warned that further | misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.. On 27 June 1988, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Board.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03292-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval “Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8344 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. on 20 August 1986, you received NUP for breaking restriction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00260-09
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 23 April 1986, administrative discharge action was initiated 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 injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06540-08
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...