DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 04243-10
14 January 2011
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 12 January 2011. 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 entered active duty in the Marine Corps on 22 March 1993, and
served without disciplinary incident until 22 November 1993, when
you received nonjudicial punishment for three specifications of
unauthorized absence (UA) and wrongful appropriation. Shortly
thereafter, on 19 January 1994, you were convicted at a special
court-martial (SPCM) for three specifications of UA. Therefore,
you were recommended for separation with an other than honorable
(OTH) discharge due to misconduct. You waived your rights to
consult with counsel and request an administrative discharge
board (ADB). The separation authority approved the
recommendation and on 2 May 1994, you were separated with an OTH
discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
due to your serious and repetitive misconduct. Additionally, the
Board found that you waived your procedural right to an ADB, your
best opportunity 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.
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. SEAN F R
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03777-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your © application on 20 January 2011. After consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | 06566-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2011. 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 24 January 1994, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04085-11
| A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your > application on 25 January 2012. 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 civil conviction, an NJP and two SCMs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03038-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 7itting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2011. 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 5 December 1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03551-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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 | CY2011 | 12292 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2012. Shortly thereafter, you received the following NJP’s: on 15 November 1993, for UA, three specifications of dereliction of duty and being incapacitated for duty; and on 11 November 1994, for 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00979-11
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 December 1994, you were advised that your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an andividual is discharged for misconduct and is not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10691-10
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. On 1 November-1993, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. On 32 January 1994, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10797-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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, whe applying for a correction of an official naval record, the ‘burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03870-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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...