DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-57100
CRS
Docket No: 12414-08
4 December 2009
, .
This is in reference to your application for further
consideration of 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 18 November 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’
Bfter 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.
rs
The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 6
February 1989. You received nonjudicial punishment on two
occasions for offenses that included absence from appointed place
of duty, disobedience of a lawful order, and dereliction of duty.
On 25 October 1990 a special court-martial convened and found you
guilty of an unauthorized absence of eight days and uttering a
worthless check. The court sentenced you to confinement at hard
labor for 90 days, reduction in rate, and a bad conduct
discharge. You were separated from the Marine Corps on 3 March
1993 with a bad conduct discharge.
In its réview of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and good post service conduct. The Board
found those factors insufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge, given your extensive disciplinary record. The
Board noted that it is precluded by law from taking any action
that would disturb the finality of a court-martial, and that it
may modify a sentence as a matter of clemency only. It concluded
that clemency was not warranted in your case. 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 | CY2009 | 01178-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | CY2008 | 01178-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | CY2008 | 10303-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2009. On 14 August 1975, after consulting with a military lawyer you requested that the Marine Corps issue you an_ undesirable discharge in order to avoid court-martial for four additional periods of UA totaling 571 days, three of which were terminated by apprehension. In this regard the Board believed considerable clemency was extended to you when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01190-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 | 06284-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. A special court-martial convened on 19 January 1968 and convicted you of an unauthorized absence of about 61 days. However, it does not change the facts of the underlying The Board concluded that the discharge was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08002-08
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. , Finally, the Board noted that you were issued a clemency discharge under the provisions of PP-4313, but concluded that a further change, which would make you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03697-08
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 request for discharge was granted and on 25 March 1976, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06867-06
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. On 6 November 2002, the Naval Clemency Board mitigated the dishonorable discharge to a bad conduct discharge. 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 | CY2008 | 02194-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2009. You received an OTH on 3 December 1980. 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 | CY2008 | 04660-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...