Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06381-07
Original file (06381-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100.

 

TJIR
Docket No: 6381-07
29 April 2008

  

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 22 April 2008. 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.

and began a period of active duty on 28 September 1976. During
the period from 21 January 1976 to 2 May 1978 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for wrongful
possession and use of marijuana, gambling, a three day period of

unauthorized absence (UA), absence from your appointed place of
duty, and failure to obey a lawful order

(SPCM) of two periods of UA totalling 69 days, missing the
movement of your ship, and disobedience. You were sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for two months and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). After the BCD was approved at all levels of
review, on 22 August 1980 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 assertion that your

punishment for being UA was too harsh. Nevertheless, the Board

concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
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.

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,

W. DEAN

Executive D

   

 

 

ND

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04755-09

    Original file (04755-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2010. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your misconduct and your lengthy periods of UA from the Marine Corps which resulted in three NJPs and a SPCM. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the’ applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 08552-03

    Original file (08552-03.rtf) 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.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. A portion of the forfeitures and the BCD were suspended for six months.The record reflects five...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01415-10

    Original file (01415-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 2010. 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 25 June 1973 you received NUP for six periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a one day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02989-01

    Original file (02989-01.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 October 2001. 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02916-07

    Original file (02916-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. During the period from 25 to 29 October 1975 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for four days. However, no disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04821-07

    Original file (04821-07.rtf) 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.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 Navy on 15 October 1973 at age 24. With regard to your contention, the record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02884-02

    Original file (02884-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. duty for 14 days. However, this request was denied and on 9 May 1979, after the BCD was approved at all levels of review, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13178-09

    Original file (13178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. 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 | CY2007 | 05649-07

    Original file (05649-07.rtf) 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.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 6 August 1975 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11469-10

    Original file (11469-10.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a SPCM and periods of UA totaling over 11 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...