Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04660-10
Original file (04660-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TAL
Docket No: 4660-10
31 January 2011

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 26 January 2011. 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
iajustbice .

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 5 December 1968 at age 20. On 21 May 1971, you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two instances of
unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period totaling
620 days. The sentence imposed was six months confinement, and a
bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 28 June 1971, you were again UA
from your unit for a period of 93 days until you were apprehended
by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on 29 September 1971. On

10 November 1971, you received the BCD after appellate review was
complete.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. 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 a $PCM and periods of UA that lasted over one year
and 11 months. Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy
regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due
solely to the passage of time. 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 probaple material error or injustice.

3

3 Sincerely,

ie \
W. DEAN PFEIL
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04227-10

    Original file (04227-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN _ Docket No: 04227-10 13 January 2011 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 13 January 2011. ‘Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04329-10

    Original file (04329-10.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. Upon completion of the alternative service, former service members were granted a clemency discharge. 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 | CY2011 | 05736-11

    Original file (05736-11.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 November 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 November 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10982-10

    Original file (10982-10.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. 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. As a result, on 27 January 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02761-09

    Original file (02761-09.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. On 11 October 1972, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 111 day period of UA from your unit and sentenced to four months of confinement, forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08250-10

    Original file (08250-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2011. 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06429-10

    Original file (06429-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 2011. Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your four NJP’s and GCM conviction of periods of UA totaling over 17 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11523-10

    Original file (11523-10.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NJP and GCM conviction of periods of UA totaling over 12 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07775-07

    Original file (07775-07.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 June 2008. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04025-01

    Original file (04025-01.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 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. your application, together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Consequently,...