Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01832-09
Original file (01832-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

BAN

Docket No: 1832-09
17 November 2009

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Séction 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 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.

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 15 October 1971, and served
without disciplinary incident until 10 December 1973, when you
were convicted at a special court-martial for an unauthorized
absence in excess of nine months, and received a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). After appellate review, on 19 December 1973,
you were separated from the naval service with a BCD and 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.
Finally, 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,

\DQueS 2
W. DEAN PF |
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01979-09

    Original file (01979-09.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. 4 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. On 11 June 1974, you were convicted at a special court-martial {(SPCM) for being in an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00719-09

    Original file (00719-09.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,. 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 | CY2008 | 12371-08

    Original file (12371-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of, Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2009. You received the BCD after appellate review was completed. 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 | 06516-08

    Original file (06516-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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 27 January 1975, you waived the right to request restoration to duty and requested execution of the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08002-08

    Original file (08002-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 04499-08

    Original file (04499-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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 | 02100-09

    Original file (02100-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materiai 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00919-08

    Original file (00919-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. 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 | 00988-09

    Original file (00988-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 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 | CY2009 | 01590-09

    Original file (01590-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 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...