Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09073-08
Original file (09073-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SIN
Docket No: 09073-08
30 July 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 28 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, reguiations,
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 22 September 1975 at age 17. On 14 January 1977, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for disobedience (not
checking out on liberty). Based on the information currently
contained in your record it appears you submitted a written
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for possession of marijuana and drug
paraphernalia, a brief period of unauthorized absence (UA),
disorderly conduct, and three specifications of absence from your
appointed place of duty. Purther, it appears your request was
denied and you were convicted by summary court-marital (SCM) of
those charges.

On 22 August 1977, you were convicted by SCM of two instances of
absence from your appointed place of duty and failure to go to
your appointed place of duty. On 8 September and 28 October
1977, you received NUP for seven specifications of breaking
restriction, and using a government vehicle for personal use. On
30 November 1978, you were convicted by special eourt-martial
(SPCM) of two specifications of larceny. You were sentenced to
confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, a reduction in
paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). However, on

28 December 1978, your commanding officer suspended the BCD for a
period of six months.

On 23 July 1979, you were convicted by civil authorities of
injury through robbery of a taxi driver in Japan. You were
sentenced to a six year period of forced labor. Based on this
conviction you were processed for an administrative discharge by
reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. On 27 July 1979
you were notified of this pending administrative separation
action and elected to consult counsel and have your case heard by
a board of officers. On 17 August 1979, your case was forwarded
and on 28 August 1979, the separation authority directed your
separation by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. You
were so discharged on 27 August 1982.

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 any change in your
discharge given your three NJP’s, two SCM convictions, and
conviction by civil authorities and ensuing incarceration for a
very serious offense. 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,

Boat:

. DEAN PF
Bxecutive Diwector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8164 13

    Original file (NR8164 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2014. 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 | CY2010 | 05796-10

    Original file (05796-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05252-08

    Original file (05252-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 06162-08

    Original file (06162-08.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. During the period 4 April to 10 August 1978, you were in a UA status, a period of about 128 days. On 15 August 1979, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7480 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7480 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 June 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. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of another court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06151-10

    Original file (06151-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 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. You served without disciplinary incident until 6 July 1978, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01454-09

    Original file (01454-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the - existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4659 13

    Original file (NR4659 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2014. 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 3 April 1979, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two specifications of failing to go to your appointed place of duty,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6077 13

    Original file (NR6077 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2014. 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...