Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06252-10
Original file (06252-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TAL
Docket No: 6252-10
16 March 2011

This ig 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 9 March 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
injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve and began a period of
active duty on 13 February 1956 at age 18. You were counseled
regarding your 12 unexcused absences from inactive duty training
(IDT) and declared an unsatisfactory participant. You were
notified of pending administrative discharge processing with a
general discharge due to unsatisfactory participation. You
waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 18 October 1958, you
received the general discharge for unsatisfactory participation.

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 concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in over 12 unexcused absences. Finally, there is no
provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for
recharacterization of service due solely to the passage of time
or good conduct in civilian life. 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,

Sua’

W. DEAN‘ P E
Executive to

\

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06223-10

    Original file (06223-10.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 March 2011. On 15 February 1994, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to unsatisfactory participation. 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 | 10976-10

    Original file (10976-10.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. On 18 April 1986 you enlisted in the Navy Reserve and began a period of active duty on 3 November 1986. 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 | 11446-10

    Original file (11446-10.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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with a general discharge due to unsatisfactory participation. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08274-10

    Original file (08274-10.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. You forfeited all of your procedural rights, including your right to an administrative discharge...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6320 13

    Original file (NR6320 13.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 2014. 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 | CY2011 | 05897-11

    Original file (05897-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 March 2012. On 10 August 2006, you were notified of pending administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to unsatisfactory participation. 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 | CY1999 | 08561-98

    Original file (08561-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _( A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 1999. 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. Board concluded that the assigned reenlistment code in this case Accordingly, was harmless error and does not warrant removal. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7114 13

    Original file (NR7114 13.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 August 2014. 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 | 05269-10

    Original file (05269-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to change your reentry code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the ‘existence of probab¥e material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01609-10

    Original file (01609-10.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. 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. At that time the discharge authority stated that you were not recommended for reenlistment because of your failure to maintain at least an 85%...