Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01634-10
Original file (01634-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 1634-10
19 October 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 19 October 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. You entered active duty in the Marine
Corps on 28 April 1972. You received nonjudicial punishment on
Seven occasions for absence from your appointed place of duty
(two specifications), failure to obey a lawful order (two
specifications), wrongful use of marijuana, and unauthorized
absence (three specifications totaling ten days). You were
notified of pending administrative separation processing with
an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to unfitness. You
elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB), which met and found that you had were unfit for
further military service and recommended your separation with
an OTH discharge. The discharge authority concurred with the
ADB’s finding and recommendation. You were so discharged on 17
January 1974, and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reenlistment code.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
current desire for veterans’ benefits. However, the Board
concluded that your OTH discharge should not be changed due to
your numerous acts of misconduct. In view of the above, your
Yapplication has been denied. The names and votes of the
‘members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

$79

tee 8 oe te

"Tt i¢ 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,

Wink ;
W. DEAN
Executive i tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12004-09

    Original file (12004-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. t. RS ou are advised that the President Ford era alternate service proclamation applied to unauthorized absence and draft evasion offenses to avoid service in Vietnam. 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 | 01749-10

    Original file (01749-10.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 November 2010. You are further advised that there is evidence in your service record which is contrary to your allegation. 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 | 10388-09

    Original file (10388-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BUG Docket No: 10388-9a9 29 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. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13226-09

    Original file (13226-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. The ADB found that you committed misconduct and recommended that you be separated with an OTH discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03551-09

    Original file (03551-09.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 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. 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 | 01765-10

    Original file (01765-10.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 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. 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 | 02559-10

    Original file (02559-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 10511-09

    Original file (10511-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 01271-10

    Original file (01271-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2010. You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which met and found that you had ‘committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense), but recommended that you be retained. 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 | 01760-10

    Original file (01760-10.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 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...