Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13277-09
Original file (13277-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 13277-09
16 September 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 14 September 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you reenlisted in the
Marine Corps on 26 March 1987, after more than four years of
honorable service. You received nonjudicial punishment for
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling eight days. You were
convicted at a special court-martial of two periods of UA
totaling 97 days. Your sentence included a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). On 13 August 1991, after appellate review,
you received the BCD.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and alleged drug abuse. However, the Board

concluded that your BCD should not be changed due to your
lengthy periods of UA. In view of the above, 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,

\w ‘Ness Pp
Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12900-09

    Original file (12900-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 2010. On 21 September 1973, after appellate review, you received the 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 | CY2009 | 11815-09

    Original file (11815-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2010. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two NJP’s and SPCM conviction for periods of UA totaling over two months. 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 | 03563-09

    Original file (03563-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 13295-09

    Original file (13295-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09573-09

    Original file (09573-09.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. It also considered your assertion of personal family matters occurring at the time you were serving in the Navy, which presumably resulted in your periods of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10971-09

    Original file (10971-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2010. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your three NUJP’s and SPCM conviction for periods of UA totaling over four years. 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 | 12776-09

    Original file (12776-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in three NUP’s, conviction by SPCM for periods of UA totaling over five months, and the fact that you were given an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02501-10

    Original file (02501-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 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. However, on 28 February 1974, you received your fourth NJP for being UA a total of 69 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00013-10

    Original file (00013-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00521-10

    Original file (00521-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. On 28 August 1985, after appellate review, you were so discharged. 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.