Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07251-10
Original file (07251-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

Docket No: 07251-10
Y April 2072

 

 

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 6 April 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 and began a period of active
duty on 16 April 1973. On 4 November 1973, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for sleeping on watch. On 11
February 1974, you received NUP for failure to obey a lawful
order. On 19 March 1975, you received NUP for disobeying a
lawful order. On 4 August 1975, you received NJP two incidents
of dereliction in the performance of your duties, failure to go
to your appointed place of duty, and willful disebedience of a
noncommissioned officer. On 3 September 1975, you received NJP
for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for five days.
On 2 October 1975, you received NUP for insubordinate conduct
toward a noncommissioned officer. On 29 December 1975, you
received NUP for being UA for three days. On 26 January 1976,
you received NUP for being UA for three days and smoking while on
watch. On 23 March 1976, you received NUP for misbehavior of a
sentinel by sleeping on security watch. You were informed that
you would receive a general discharge at the expiration of your
term of active obligated service and an RE-4 reenlistment code
since you were not recommended for reenlistment. The discharge
authority directed a general discharge. You were so discharged
on 26 April 1976.

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 nine NUJP’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 anfindividual 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. D

EAN PF F
Executive IX Oo

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04062-12

    Original file (04062-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, his 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 | CY2012 | 01648-12

    Original file (01648-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2013. 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. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2013.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04613-10

    Original file (04613-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00670-11

    Original file (00670-11.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, reguiations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08039-10

    Original file (08039-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 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. Consequé1itly, 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 | 13157 11

    Original file (13157 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 August 2012. 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 concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your serious...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04276-08

    Original file (04276-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2009. 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 fora correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10710-10

    Original file (10710-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 10 August 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05054-09

    Original file (05054-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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 28 December 1976 the separation authority directed that you be separated for misconduct with a general discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05198-10

    Original file (05198-10.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. 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 submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.