Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04143-09
Original file (04143-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SIN
Docket No: 04143-09
22 March 2010

  

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 16 March 2010. 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on

28 May 1980 at age 20. On 6 February 1981, you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of unauthorized absence (UA) and
larceny. On 26 May 1981, you were convicted by special court~
Martial ({SPCM) of larceny and disobedience. You were sentenced
to a forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement at
hard labor, 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, overall
record of service, and contentions. Nevertheless, the Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your SCM and SPCM
convictions for serious offenses. Concerning your contentions
please be advised that the Board is expressly forbidden by law
from reviewing the findings of guilt rendered by a court-martial
and therefore must restrict its review to the sentence which was
imposed. The Board concluded that a BCD was an appropriate
separation in light of the seriousness of your misconduct.
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,

No

W. DEAN PF
Executive D tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01418-10

    Original file (01418-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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 25 June 1982 you began a period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04590-11

    Original file (04590-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. You were sentenced to receive 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 01450-09

    Original file (01450-09.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. 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 | CY2010 | 01063-10

    Original file (01063-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 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. «Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00931-02

    Original file (00931-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 26 March 1981 you were convicted by SPCM of two incidents of larceny in the amount of $310, government vehicle, and communicating a threat. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06450-09

    Original file (06450-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 May 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of two NJP’s...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07707-01

    Original file (07707-01.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 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06848-09

    Original file (06848-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “BR three-member panei of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. On 28 September 1971 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of larceny of $80, the property of another Marine. 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 | CY2009 | 06848-09

    Original file (06848-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “BR three-member panei of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. On 28 September 1971 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of larceny of $80, the property of another Marine. 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.