Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05558-10
Original file (05558-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BJG
Docket No: 5558-10
10 February 2011

 

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 8 February 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

You entered active duty in the Marine Corps on 20 May 1980.

You received nonjudicial punishment on six occasions for
sleeping on post, unlawful entry, disobeying and disrespect to
a noncommissioned officer, and three specifications of
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling over 13 hours. You also had
another period of UA totaling five days for which no
disciplinary action was taken. You were then notified that
your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative
separation with an under conditions other than honorable (OTH)
discharge due to misconduct (minor disciplinary infractions).
You waived all of your procedural rights, including your right
to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 30 November
1983, you received an under conditions OTH discharge due to
misconduct (minor disciplinary infractions), and were assigned
an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
belief that you have a general discharge, which you state no
longer exists. The Board concluded, however, that your
discharge should not be upgraded due to your numerous acts of
misconduct. The Boayd found that you waived your right to an
ADB* your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. You are advised that no discharge
is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service
good conduct. You are further advised that a general discharge
still does exist, however, you do not have this type of
characterization of service. In view of the above, 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 P
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07387-10

    Original file (07387-10.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. 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 | CY2008 | 05789-08

    Original file (05789-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged that separation could result in an OTH discharge and been afforded the right to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04706-08

    Original file (04706-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. On 20 July 1990, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02235-08

    Original file (02235-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05566-10

    Original file (05566-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2011. You also had two additional periods of UA totaling 37 days for which no disciplinary action was taken. 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 | 01811-11

    Original file (01811-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2011. You also have another period of UA totaling 7i days for which no disciplinary action was taken. 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 | 05448-10

    Original file (05448-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2011. 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 | CY2008 | 04581-08

    Original file (04581-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2012 | 00310 12

    Original file (00310 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 October 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07486-07

    Original file (07486-07.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 May 2008. 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...