Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05727-10
Original file (05727-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TAL
Docket No: 5727-10
18 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 16 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 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 15 April 1989 at age 17. You received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) on three occasions for dereliction in
performance of duty, two instances of insubordinate conduct
toward a noncommissioned officer, disobeying a lawful written
regulation, and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.

On 13 November 1987 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) from
your unit for a period of three days that ended 16 November 1987.
After your second NUP, you were counseled regarding your
misconduct and warned that further offenses could result in
administrative separation. You were afforded a reasonable
opportunity to overcome your deficiencies, which you negated by
your third NIP and a period of UA. Based on the information
currently contained in your record it appears that you were
subsequently processed for separation by reason of misconduct due

to a pattern of misconduct. You waived all of your procedural
rights, including your right to an administrative discharge board
(ABD). On 9 March 1988, you received the OTH discharge for

misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall recoyd of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors, were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
characterizattion of service or narrative reason of your discharge
given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in three
NUPs. The Board noted that after you were counseled and warned
that further misconduct could result in administrative
separation, you committed more offenses. The Board also noted
that you waived the right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a better characterization of service. Finally, no
discharge is upgraded merely because of the passage of time or an
individual's good behavior after discharge. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.

Each branch of the Armed Forces established its own criteria for
enlistment within the provisions of federal law. The
characterization, narrative reason for separation, and
reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps are not binding
upon the other services, which are free to accept or reject an
application on the basis of their own standards. If another
branch of service decides to grant you a waiver and accept you
for enlistment, the Marine Corps will not object.

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,

WW Rees

Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00731-09

    Original file (00731-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 June 1988, you received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana and UA. Additionally, after your third NUP, you were counseled and warned that further | misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.. On 27 June 1988, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. Board.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6723 13

    Original file (NR6723 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 5 August 2014. 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 warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01507-11

    Original file (01507-11.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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge 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 | CY2010 | 10771-10

    Original file (10771-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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. 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 | 05757-10

    Original file (05757-10.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. Finally, the Board also noted on 5 June 1987 you were offered the right to request in-patient alcohol rehabilitation treatment from the Veterans Administration Hospital nearest your home, but signed a waiver refusing treatment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05280-10

    Original file (05280-10.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 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. 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 | CY2011 | 01014-11

    Original file (01014-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 9 November 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. 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 | 04845-10

    Original file (04845-10.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 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late brother's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board found that he was counseled regarding periods of unauthorized absences (UA) and wrongful use of a controlled substance, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03967-08

    Original file (03967-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. You waived your right to consult with counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by 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 | CY2009 | 11672-09

    Original file (11672-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...