Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00095-11
Original file (00095-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TUR
Docket No: 95-11
8 April 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 5 April 2011. The names and votes of the

members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 on 21 May 1968 at age 18. You
served for nearly a year without disciplinary incident. However,
on 29 April 1969, while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN),
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for communicating a
threat to kill and were awarded reduction to paygrade E-1 and a
$100 forfeiture of pay, all of which were suspended for six
months. Nonetheless, on 17 June 1969, the suspended punishment
was vacated due to your continued misconduct. About three months
later, on 23 September 1969, you received NUP for failure to obey
a lawful order and were awarded extra duty for 14 days, a $100
forfeiture of pay, and reduction to paygrade E-1. The reduction
was suspended for four months.

On 12 February 1971 you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of making a false identification card and theft of a
government check. You were sentenced to confinement at hard
Lig:

 

 

labor for four months, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a $400
forfeiture of pay. Shortly thereafter, on 14 May 1971, you were
honorably released from active duty upon the expiration of your

obligated service.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your overall satisfactory service, time served in RVN, post
service conduct, and desire to correct your record to reflect

s that you were nots.reduced in paygrade. Nevertheless, the Board

concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief
because of the geriousness of your repetitive misconduct which
resulted in two NUPs, a SPCM, and reduction in paygrade in each
disciplinary action. Accordingly, your application has been

denied.

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

. DEAN PF
Executive D r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03701-09

    Original file (03701-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 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. 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 | 02157-10

    Original file (02157-10.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 30 January 1969, shortly after being released from confinement, you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended on 8 April 1969, On 19 May 1969 you were again UA for a three day. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04823-11

    Original file (04823-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01057-11

    Original file (01057-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 | CY2002 | 03661-02

    Original file (03661-02.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 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 1971, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $40 forfeiture of pay and restriction for seven days. three months, a $300 forfeiture of pay, and a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04170-11

    Original file (04170-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 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. 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 | 10989-10

    Original file (10989-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval’ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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 | CY2009 | 04679-09

    Original file (04679-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | 03627-10

    Original file (03627-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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 | 06087-10

    Original file (06087-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...