Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01122-10
Original file (01122-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
: 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 01122-10
4 November 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 3 November 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 14 October 1959. Between 6 November 1961 and 22 March
1963, you received four nonjudicial punishments (NUJP"s). You
committed the following offenses: failure to make bed check,
being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on three occasions,
and dereliction in the performance of your duty. You were
informed that you would receive an RE-4 reenlistment code at the
expiration of your term of active obligated service since you
were not recommended for reenlistment. The discharge authority
directed a general discharge. You were so discharged on

18 October 1963.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. However, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service,
given your record of four NUP’s for misconduct. The Board also
noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge
since a separation under other than honorable conditions is often

directed when an individual is found to have committed
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,

W. DEAN P
Executive D or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01051-10

    Original file (01051-10.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. On 1 July 1963, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being UA nine days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04627-06

    Original file (04627-06.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 8 August 1961 at age 17. On 3 June 1963, you were committed to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02513-10

    Original file (02513-10.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. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SCM of misconduct, and civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02609-09

    Original file (02609-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 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 10 October 1962, you received NJP for UA from your unit.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07898-09

    Original file (07898-09.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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient 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 error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13314-09

    Original file (13314-09.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 September 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 | CY2010 | 05093-10

    Original file (05093-10.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. On 11 January 1966, you received NUP for being UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02417-09

    Original file (02417-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02574-09

    Original file (02574-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12120-09

    Original file (12120-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2010. On 13 July 1993, you were notified that administrative discharge procedures were initiated and that you would receive a general discharge and reenlistment code of RE-4 upon your separation. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of a general discharge.