DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
‘ 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 01928-10
18 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 17 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 9 June 1984. On 1 February
1985, you were convicted at a summary court-martial (SCM) of
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, being
disrespectful toward the first sergeant, failure to obey a lawful
order, and sleeping on post. You were sentenced to a forfeiture
of $100, reduction in pay grade, and confinement at hard labor
for 20 days. On 20 April 1985, you were convicted by a civilian
criminal court of armed robbery. You were sentenced to
confinement for 185 days.
Your commanding officer recommended that you receive an under
other than honorable (OTH) discharge by reason of misconduct .
Subsequently, your case was forwarded, and the discharge
authority approved the recommendation. You were s0 discharged on
16 December 1985.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and prior honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct
that resulted in a civilian criminal conviction and confinement.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board believes that you may be eligible for veterans’
benefits that accrued during your first period of service.
Whether or not you are eligible for benefits based on this period
of service is a matter under the cognizance of the Department of
Veterans Affairs {DVA). If you have been denied benefits, you
should appeal that denial under procedures established by the
e*DVA.
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 efficial 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03562-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00564-10
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 LIyUustice., You reenlisted in the Navy on 14 May 1984. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of conviction by SPCM of drug abuse and misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01935-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 2010. On 13 October 1983, you received your third NJP for an additional UA period. On 27 January 1984, you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04594-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2010. On 20 June 1983, you were convicted by SPCM of a four year and eight month period of UA from your unit. 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 | CY2007 | 07629-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. About two months later, on 22 March 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a f our day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04245-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2010. On 29 April 1965, your commanding officer forwarded your case concurring with the Boards’ findings and recommendation that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. 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 | 11596-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 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 August 1993, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03027-09
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 three NUP’s and conviction by two SCM’s and one SPCM for serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03530-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement During the period from 1 to 13 March 1956 you were convicted by civil authorities of failure to appear, two day period of UA. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05338-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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...