DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
SIN
Docket No: 08188-08
7 duly 2009
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 1 July 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 and began a period of active
duty on 5 May 1981 at age 27. On 2 August 1982, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two days of unauthorized absence
(UA) and disobedience. On 15 May 1984, you were convicted by
special court-martial (SPCM) of 138 days of UA. You received .
confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, and a reduction.
in paygrade. On 21 September 1984, you received NUP for failure
to go to your appointed place of duty. On 29 May 1985, you were
convicted by a second SPCM of 165 days of UA. You were sentenced
to confinement, a forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). You received the BCD after appellate review was
completed.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given your record of two NUP’s and convictions
by SPCM for periods of UA totaling 10 wonths. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06939-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | 12426-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 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 12 August 1987, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01450-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 2009. During the period from 16 May 1983 to 23 April 1984, you had three periods of UA totaling 295 days. 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 | CY2007 | 07529-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2008. 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. About four months later, on 2 November 1984, you were convicted by SPCM of a 48 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 63...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01780-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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 23 May 1984 you received your third NUP for a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction for 15 days and a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08761-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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 | CY2010 | 05776-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2011. You were sentenced to confinement, a forfeiture of pay, a reduction in paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when apppying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is ‘on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probableg material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00719-09
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,. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00989-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 2009. You received confinement and a forfeiture of pay. 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 | CY2006 | 05034-06
OS A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 November 2006. 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. for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.