Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11673-10
Original file (11673-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SON
Docket No: 11673-10
17 August 2011

This igs in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code, gection 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your —
application on 16 August 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 3 October 1977. The Board found that you received six
nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for disobedience and five periods
of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 68 days. You were also
convicted by civilian authorities of larceny. You were sentenced
to three years probation. Subsequently, administrative discharge
action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to civil
conviction. You were notified of this pending administrative
separation action and elected to consult counsel and have your
case heard by a board of officers. The board found that you had
committed misconduct due to moral turpitude, and recommended that
you receive an other than honorable (OTH) discharge. Your case
was forwarded and the discharge authority directed that you be
separated under OTH conditions by reason of misconduct. You were
so discharged on 19 March 1979.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, and character letters. Nevertheless, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in
your discharge given your six NUP’s and civil conviction of a
very serious offense. 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,
\o Dean’ }
W ~

DEAN PFE
Executive Dive Yr

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07400-10

    Original file (07400-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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 were notified of pending administrative discharge processing under other than honorable (OTH) conditions.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00934-11

    Original file (00934-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. 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 | 05787-10

    Original file (05787-10.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 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. On 4 April 1985, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11379-10

    Original file (11379-10.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 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. You are advised that no discharge is automatically upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11372-10

    Original file (11372-10.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 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. On 13 April 2005, your case was forwarded and the discharge authority concurred with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and directed that you be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08284-10

    Original file (08284-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. 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 | 03932-11

    Original file (03932-11.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 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 ‘prébable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00612-11

    Original file (00612-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 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 | 07458-10

    Original file (07458-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. 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 | 06909-10

    Original file (06909-10.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 March 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...