Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00291-10
Original file (00291-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TJR
Docket No: 291-10
13 October 2010

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 6 October 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 10 August 1966 at age 19 and
began a period of active duty. The following month, on 1 and 5
September 1966, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
failure to obey a lawful order and absence from your appointed
place of duty. On 27 April and again on 30 August 1967 you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 145 days.

On 19 March 1968 you were convicted by general court-martial

(GCM) of desertion as a result of 76 day of UA. You were
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for five years, forfeiture
of all allowances and pay, and a dishonorable discharge (DD).
However, the DD was subsequently remitted to a bad conduct
discharge (BCD) and the confinement was remitted to 15 months.

On 19 July 1968 you submitted a written request for clemency,
specifically, a reduced forfeiture of pay and confinement, and to
be issued a general discharge. However, the BCD was approved at
all levels of review, and on 14 February 1969, you were issued a
BCD.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertion that you believed that you and your
brother should not have received orders to Vietnam at the same
time. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the
seriousness of your misconduct and your repetitive and lengthy
eriods of UA from the ?Marine Corps. Finally, there is no
@ridenge.in the*record, and you submitted none, to support your
assertion. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

_" i

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,

‘Sage

W. DEAN PFRI
Executive JQ}

   

 

x

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09486-08

    Original file (09486-08.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08600-06

    Original file (08600-06.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 July 2007. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, on 17 November 1969 you received your sixth NUP for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days. The record further reflects that on 1...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2085 14

    Original file (NR2085 14.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 February 2015. However, two months later, on 26 August 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 60 day period of UA. 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 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.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 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

    Original file (01178-09.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 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 | CY2010 | 01094-10

    Original file (01094-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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 seven...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06291-10

    Original file (06291-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. 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 | 03186-09

    Original file (03186-09.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 March 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 the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10683-07

    Original file (10683-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 June 1967, while on ‘probation, you began a UA that ended about 187 days later when you surrendered. On 9 February 1968, the suspended sentence was vacated and the BCD was ordered executed. On 16 February 1968, you were discharged with a BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10683-07

    Original file (10683-07.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.On 19 January 1966, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 20. On 19 July 1966, you began an...