Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00215-11
Original file (00215-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 00215-11
27 October 2011

 

 

This is 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 26 October 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 probabie material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 April 1976, at the age of
17. On 14 April 1977, you were convicted by a special court-
martial (SPCM) of being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status
totaling 96 days. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of $150,
reduction in pay grade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). The
discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. On 4
January 1978, after appellate review, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your record of conviction by a SPCM.

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 ite 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 ali 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,

  

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11000-10

    Original file (11000-10.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 1 April 1968 you received your third NUP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty. 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 | 08250-10

    Original file (08250-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06291-10

    Original file (06291-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11326-10

    Original file (11326-10.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. 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 | 12070-10

    Original file (12070-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 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 | 10716-10

    Original file (10716-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01174-11

    Original file (01174-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 26 October 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 | 08241-10

    Original file (08241-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. On 25 November 1950, you were again convicted by SPCM of UA from your unit for a period of three days and sentenced to 30 days confinement, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06575-10

    Original file (06575-10.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden ts on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05297-10

    Original file (05297-10.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 February 2011. On 29 July 1981, you were again convicted by SPCM of the forgoing period of UA and sentenced to 90 days confinement, forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (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.