Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04264-08
Original file (04264-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

 

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

BAN
Docket No: 04264-08
10 February 2009

 

.

This is in reference to 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 5 February 2009. 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 Corps on 21 September 1981, and served
without disciplinary incident until 1 June 1982, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an unauthorized absence
(UA) .

Shortly thereafter, you received the following NJP’s: on 16 July
1982, for carrying a concealed weapon and sleeping on post; on 12
December 1982, for UA and failure to obey a lawful order; and on
8 February 1983, for UA and failure to obey a lawful order.

On 12 May 1983, you were convicted at a general court-martial for
conspiracy to commit pre-mediated murder of a fellow Marine,
accessory after the fact, failure to obey a lawful order, and
failing to notify authorities of a felony. You received a
dishonorable discharge as a result of your conviction and on 5
October 1984, you were so separated with an RE-4 reenlistment
code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and belief that enough time has elapsed to warrant
upgrading your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of the seriousness of your misconduct.
Further, there is no provision in the law or regulations that
allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the
passage of time. 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,

¢
W. DEAN PFEIPRE
Executive Dir

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02032-08

    Original file (02032-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2009. 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. As a result, on 21 December 1983, you were convicted by Civil authorities of violation of the Japanese Narcotic Control Law and sentenced to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02243-11

    Original file (02243-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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 | CY2008 | 07579-08

    Original file (07579-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 10773-09

    Original file (10773-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01915-10

    Original file (01915-10.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 concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your four NUP’s, UA's totaling over six months, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04254-08

    Original file (04254-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2009. 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 18 October 1983, you had NUP for use of marijuana.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11984-10

    Original file (11984-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 10 August 2011. The sentence imposed wag confinement for 45 days, a forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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 | CY2001 | 02451-01

    Original file (02451-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and considered your 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. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, including drug abuse and assault, which resulted in five conviction. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02855-09

    Original file (02855-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 15 December 2009. 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 material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05649 11

    Original file (05649 11.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 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...