Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09930-09
Original file (09930-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 09930-09
24 June 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 23 June 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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 19 July 1972, at age 19. On 18 May 1973, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being in an unauthorized absence
(UA) status for four days. On 6 July 1973, you received NUP for
being UA for a period of 15 days. On 24 August 1973, you
received NJP for being UA for a period of three days. On 20
November 1973, you were convicted at a special court-martial
(SPCM) for being UA 18 days. You were sentenced to forfeitures
of $100, 15 days restriction, and confinement at hard labor for
30 days. On 21 January 1974, you received NUP for wearing an
improper uniform. On 25 January 1974, you were convicted at a
summary court-martial (SCM) for being UA six days. You were
sentenced to forfeitures of $150, and confinement at hard labor
for 30 days. On 15 May and 19 June 1974, you received NUP’s for
being absent from your appointed place of duty. On 26 August
1974, you received NJP for being UA six days. On 10 September
1974, you received NUP for being UA fiv days. Between 17 October
and 19 November 1974, you received three additional NUP’s for
period of UA totaling three days, and 10 hours. On 12 December
1974, you received NUP for willfully Gisobeying a lawful order.
On 2 January 1975, administrative discharge action was initiated
by reason of unfitness. Your case was heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an
other than honorable discharge. Your commanding officer
concurred with the ADB’s recommendation and forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct for unfitness. On 19 February
1975, you were so discharged. At that time you were assigned an
RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct,
and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the
reenlistment code or characterization of your discharge, given
your record of 12 NJP'’s and convictions by one SPCM and one SCM.

In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an
individual is discharged prior to the expiration of his term of
active obligated service for misconduct and is not recommended
for retention. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03451-10

    Original file (03451-10.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 February 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. 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 | CY2007 | 11117-07

    Original file (11117-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00917-08

    Original file (00917-08.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. On 5 December 1975 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to conviction by civil authorities.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00177 12

    Original file (00177 12.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 October 2012. 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 were also convicted by civil authorities of assault and sentenced to two days in jail.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01537-11

    Original file (01537-11.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. On 9 August 1973 you were ‘convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 27 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $408 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge {BCD}. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01172-07

    Original file (01172-07.rtf) 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.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 23 May 1972 at age 18. On 19 September 1973 you were again...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02408-09

    Original file (02408-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06575-07

    Original file (06575-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. ‘However, your request was disapproved on 12 October 1973, and on 19 November 1973, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 46 day period of UA, disrespect, and two instances of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05198-10

    Original file (05198-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 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 submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06582-09

    Original file (06582-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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 30 May 1975 you received NUP for a 16 day period of UA.