DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5160
TUR
Docket No: 5773-09
24 May 2010
‘This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 18 May 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 ail
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 on 23 April 1990 at age 18 and
served without disciplinary incident until 16 August 1990, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP}) for impersonating a
lance corporal (LCPL) .
During the period from 12 September to 4 December 1991 you
received three more NJPs and were convicted by summary court-
martial (SCM). Your offenses were two periods of absence from
your appointed place of duty, wrongful possession of an altered
identification card, wrongfully wearing a LCPL insignia, stealing
perfume from an exchange, breaking restriction, possession of
alcoholic beverages, disobedience, and a one day period of
unauthorized absence.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After
Waiving your procedural rights, the discharge authority directed
your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 10 January 1992, you
were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertion that you chose to be discharged because
of personal and family issues. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in four NUJPs and a SCM. Finally, you
waived your procedural rights to an ADB, and by doing go you
eliminated your right to defend yourself and the possibility of a
better characterization of service. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
Lo oad
W. DEAN P
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00977-10
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. 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 | 02608-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2010. On 12 September 1991, you were so discharged. 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 | CY2013 | NR3934-13
Documentary material conaidered 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 26 June 1990 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 13 July 1990, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07289-09
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07289-09
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04498-09
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 12 September 1980, you received NUP for 16 periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a 20 day period of UA. 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 | CY2010 | 00573-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. In this regard, *n RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11349-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. 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 a SCM and a SPCM conviction. ponsequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval “record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the fprtstence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07437-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 09320-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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.