Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2447 14
Original file (NR2447 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

BUG
Docket No: 2447-14

29 May 2014

 

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 28 May 2014. 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. In addition, the Board considered the
reports of the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), dated 15
September 1983 and 9 December 1987, copies of which are
attached.

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 enlisted in the Marine Corps and entered a period of active
duty on 18 August 1978. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) on eight occasions and were convicted by a summary court-
Martial. Your offenses included failure to go to your appointed
place of duty (seven instances), failure to obey a lawful order
{two instances), unauthorized absence (two days), disrespect
{two instances), use of provoking language (two instances),
willfully disobeying a lawful order, absence from your appointed
place of duty, and failure to obey a lawful order (two
instances). You were notified that your command was
recommending you for administrative separation with an other
than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to
misconduct. You exercised your procedural right to have your
case considered by an administrative discharge board (ADB). The
ADB found you committed misconduct and recommended an OTH
characterization of service due to misconduct. You were so
discharged on 10 September 1982 in pay grade E-1 and assigned an
RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.

In its review off your application, the Board considered all

potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service
good conduct, and current desire to upgrade your
characterization of service and reenlistment code. However, the
Board concluded that no relief was warranted in your case
because of your numerous acts of misconduct and non-
recommendation for reenlistment. The Board did not find the OTH
characterization of service overly harsh in light of your nine
disciplinary actions, which included one NUP after your ADB.
Regarding your counsel’s contention that your record was
incomplete before your ADB and NDRB, the Board used the
presumption of regularity that attaches to all naval records and
noted that if an NUP appeal is granted in full, the NUP would
not be in your record. 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,
ROBERT D., {~-
Acting Executive Director

Enclosures

Copy to:

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6780 13

    Original file (NR6780 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 16 July 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. 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 | NR8945 13

    Original file (NR8945 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 24 September 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2343-13

    Original file (NR2343-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 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. 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 | NR9033 13

    Original file (NR9033 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 1 October 2014. You waived your procedural right to 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 | CY2008 | 02177-08

    Original file (02177-08.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. On 10 May 1985, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2802-13

    Original file (NR2802-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval © Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9033 13_Redacted

    Original file (NR9033 13_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were then advised that your command was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to misconduct. You waived your procedural right to 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 | CY2010 | 06287-10

    Original file (06287-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03868-12

    Original file (03868-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2013. 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 | 02963-09

    Original file (02963-09.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. You waived your rights to consult 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...