DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 3289-11
23 January 2012
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 January 2012. 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 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 on 27 March 1986 at age 20 and
began a period of active duty. You served for about a year and
two months without disciplinary incident. However, during the
period from 26 May to 21 November 1989 you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of negligent homicide and were
sentenced to restriction for 50 days, hard labor for 45 days, and
a $500 forfeiture of pay. You also received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence
(UA), nine specifications of failure to obey a lawful order,
altering an official document, specifically, a sick slip, and
failure to pay your debts. The punishment imposed was
restriction and extra duty for 45 days, a $782 forfeiture of pay,
and reduction to paygrade E-2.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation processing by reason of misconduct due to commission
of a serious offense. After waiving your procedural rights to
consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB), on 12 December 1989, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. On 2 March 1990
the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed
your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 21 March 1990, 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, post service conduct, and desire to upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in
NJP and an SCM. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00517 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | CY2013 | NR8241 13
-A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2014. The Board, in its review of your application, considered all potentially mitigating factors present in your case. 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 | 05473 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 March 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 | 08138-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03537-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04113-01
The punishment imposed was a $176 forfeiture of On 21 August 1991 you received NJP for a day of unauthorized absence pay and restriction and extra duty for 14 days. However, the Board concluded these factors and Accordingly, your application has been Given all the circumstances of your case, NJPs. 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 | CY2007 | 08188-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2008. On 18 August 1988 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for five periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $670 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 45 days. 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 | 06305-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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. On 15 June and 3 August 1990, you received NJP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, two periods of UA totaling 28 days, and disobedience.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03524-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. On 26 September 1991, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00110-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 September 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...