DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRS
Docket No: 7075-06
2 October 2006
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 7 September 2006. Your allegations of error and
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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy after more than
three years of prior active service. The record reflects that
you received two nonjudicial punishments. The offenses included
an unauthorized absence of one day and use of cocaine.
A special court-martial convened on 30 July 1987 and found you
guilty of uttering worthless checks on six occasions and use of
methampthetamines. The court sentenced you to confinement at
hard labor for 45 days, reduction in rate and a bad conduct
discharge. The convening authority (CA) approved the bad conduct
discharge but did not order it executed at that time, pending
appellate review. You received the bad conduct discharge on 7
July 1988, after completion of appellate review.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your contention that the
discharge was not in accordance with the CA’s action. However, ©
the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the fact that
your unauthorized absences totaled more than 11 months. In this
regard, all of your sentence was approved by the CA, but the bad
conduct discharge could not be executed prior to the completion
of appellate review. Accordingly, 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,
I~
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04155-05
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 27 April 1982. Upon completion of appellate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05960-06
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 Boa d found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 7 October 1953. Nevertheless, these...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600250
After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated The Applicant and his Representative submitted the following issue, which supersedes all prior issues submitted to the Board:“I request my Bad Conduct Discharge be upgraded to a General Discharge due to equitable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05889-98
5889-98 19 April 1999 Dear &$;:;: This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02604-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement at forfeitures of $400 per month for three paygrade E-l, and a bad conduct discharge. conviction of four periods of unauthorized absence totaling more than 96 days warranted severe...
USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01024
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 970917 - 980713 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980714 Date of Discharge: 010212 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 06 29 [Doesn’t...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501188
After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the Applicant’s issues were insufficient to merit clemency (C). After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offense he committed. The Manual for Courts-Martial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10496-06
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 1 May 1967. The court sentenced you to...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600898
MD06-00898 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060616. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the Applicant’s issues were insufficient to merit clemency (C). The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Articles 86...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600085
ND06-00085 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051012. Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Three pages from Applicant’s service record Applicant’s DD Form 214 Character Reference ltr from C_ S_, Ch R_ (Raflatac), Load Coordinator, undtd Character Reference ltr from C_ D. F_, Applicant’s wife, dtd November 26, 2005 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE...