Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00960-10
Original file (00960-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SUN
Docket No: 00960-10
28 October 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 26 October 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
iWjueeL ce.

On 12 November 1982, you reenlisted in the Marine Corps after
more than three years of honorable service. The Board found that
you received five nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for two
instances of absence from your appointed place of duty, two
instances of disobedience, failure to go to your appointed place
of duty, and unauthorized absence. Additionally, you were
counseled and warned on three occasions that further misconduct
could result in administrative discharge action. Subsequently,
administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of
misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. You waived your rights
to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by
an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your case was forwarded
recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable
(OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The discharge
authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of
misconduct due to pattern of misconduct. You were so discharged
on 13 September 1985.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, and prior honorable discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your five NJP’s, and
the fact that you were counseled and warned of the consequences

of further misconduct. Finally, the Board noted that you waived
the right to an ADB, your best chance for retention or a better
characterization of service. Accordingly, your application has

been,denied:. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.

yt 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. efiieial 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,

We DEM

Executive ctor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03292-09

    Original file (03292-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval “Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2009 | 06195-09

    Original file (06195-09.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. 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 | CY2012 | 03160-12

    Original file (03160-12.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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your second NUP 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 | CY2008 | 03688-08

    Original file (03688-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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. On 28 August 1991, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00015-10

    Original file (00015-10.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10658-09

    Original file (10658-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 03729-10

    Original file (03729-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of thé Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. Additionally, after your third NJP, 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12424-09

    Original file (12424-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 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 or changing the reason for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03514-11

    Original file (03514-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 January 2012. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your first NUP, 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02181-11

    Original file (02181-11.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 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...