DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 11199-10
19 July 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 14 July 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 7 March 1987, after more
than three years of honorable service. However, on 24 June 1991,
you were convicted by a general court-martial (GCM) of an
unauthorized absence totaling two months, which ended in your
apprehension, driving while intoxicated, three specifications of
larceny, forgery, and uttering checks with the intent to defraud.
Your sentence included eighteen months confinement at hard labor,
reduction in rate, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After
appellate review, on 19 November 1993, you received a BCD.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, prior honorable service, and belief that your BCD was
unwarranted. However, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the serious misconduct of your GCM conviction.
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,
LD. Quan
W. DEAN PF
Executive re
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 June 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 | 00152-11
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval, Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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 | CY2010 | 11304-10
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10000-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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 | CY2010 | 11330-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all, material gubmitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. As a result of the NIS investigation, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of five specifications of indecent assault against female Marines, peeping through a window of a Female Marine, looking into the bathroom of a female Marine, and unlocking a bathroom door and peeping...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11629-10
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 30 March 1972 you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of a 160 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for seven months, a $525 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11234-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09041-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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 | CY2010 | 11366-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval © Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. About a month later, on 19 February 1991, you were again in a UA status for one day, however, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09290-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 May 2011. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. 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.