Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04313-09
Original file (04313-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SIN
Docket No: 04313-09
29 March 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 23 March 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 10 December 1982 at age 19. On 17 August and

26 September 1983, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for
disrespectful language, two instances of disobedience, four “
instances of communicating a threat, absence from your appointed
place of duty, and destruction of government property. On
12 October 1983, you were counseled and warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
However, on 22 December 1983, you were convicted by special
court-martial {(SPCM) of disrespectful language, disobedience, and
three days of unauthorized absence. You were sentenced to a
forfeiture of pay, reduction in paygrade, and confinement at hard
labor. On 7 March 1984, 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 14 March 1984, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct. On 23 March 1984, the
separation authority directed an other than honorable discharge
by reason of misconduct. On 4 April 1984, you were so
discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, and belief that you were being medically discharged.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your record of two NJP’s, conviction by SPCM, and the fact that
you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further
misconduct. Further, the Board noted that you waived the right
to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Finally, your medical record shows
that your problems with your feet were diagnosed in January 1984,
after all of your misconduct occurred. 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 T
Executive to

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02403-09

    Original file (02403-09.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. 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 | CY2010 | 00949-10

    Original file (00949-10.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 October 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NUP and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03100-08

    Original file (03100-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13

    Original file (NR2510-13.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 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04509-09

    Original file (04509-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00922-11

    Original file (00922-11.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. Subsequently, 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 | CY2009 | 04135-09

    Original file (04135-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02537-01

    Original file (02537-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation under other than honorable conditions. Board noted the aggravating factor that you waived the right to present your case to an ADB, should be retained or discharged under honorable conditions. 2 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 | 00023-10

    Original file (00023-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06276-07

    Original file (06276-07.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 18 February 1984, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason 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.