DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 4963-14
15 May 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.
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
12 May 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 insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Crops and began a period of active
duty on 11 February 2008. On 3 February 2011, you received NJP
for disobedience and communicating a threat. You received a
reduction in paygrade. On 14 March 2011, a Staff Judge Advocate
recommended that the charge of communicating a threat be set
aside, due to the fact that the charge did not meet the required
elements, which your commanding officer dismissed. Additionally,
he stated, in part, that the punishment awarded was not unjust in
light of your misconduct and guilty finding relating to your
failure to obey an order. You remained on active duty until you
were honorably released from active duty on 20 January 2012, and
transferred to the Marine Corps Reserve.
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 NJP is not warranted, and that
such action would be unfair to your peers, against whom you
compete 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
errer Or Injustice.
Sin ely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5554 14
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 May 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 warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04946 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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. 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 | NR5557 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00230-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2011. The Board, in its review of your record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge, and belief that you should have been discharged due to your diagnosed paranoid personality that existed prior to your entry on active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2573 14
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 March 2015. 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. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR520 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. 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 | 05939-11
KR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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 | CY2014 | NR604 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 3 March 1970, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00952-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November S011. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of thisconduct. 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 | NR3488 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2015. 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. 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...