DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 3488-14
6 April 2015
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 25 March 2015. 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 insuffi
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 20 July 2009. Based on the information currently
contained in your record, during the period from 1 November 2011
to 30 April 2014, you received two nonjudicial punishments (NJPs)
and were counseled and warned on five occasions that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After being
afforded all of your procedural rights, your case was forwarded
to the separation authority recommending that you receive an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. On
4 June 2014, the separation authority concurred and directed an
OTH discharge by reason of misconduct. You were so discharged on
13 June 2014.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service, letter from your Gunnery Sergeant and
desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, based on the
information currently contained in your record, the Board
concluded that your commanding officer’s decision to impose NJP
was appropriate, and it was administratively and procedurally
correct as written and filed. The Board further concluded that
the removal of the NUP is not warranted, and that such action
would have been unfair to your peers, against whom you competed
with for promotions and assignments. 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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in your case. 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.
Singerel
ROBERT J. O‘NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5296 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3590 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4392 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2015. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4279 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2015. On 15 July 1993, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to wrongful drug use. 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 | CY2014 | NR1623 14
A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR1811 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2015. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3612 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR1810 14
three-member panel of the Board for: Correction of Naval Records, - sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2015. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR477 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2015. 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 so discharged on 21 May 1986.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1003 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS , 791 5. You waived your rights.to consult counsel, submit a statement, or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions. Consequentiy, 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.