Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00958-11
Original file (00958-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
REC

WASHINGTON DC 20370-
: 05100 Docket No: 00958-1211
3 November 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 2 November 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 on 17 June 1974, at the age of
18, for two years. On 13 November 1974, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status
for 23 days. On 27 February 1978, you were convicted by a
special court-martial (SPCM) of being UA on three occasions
totaling 1,082 days. You were sentenced to reduction in pay
grade, confinement at hard labor for 30 days, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). The discharge authority directed the execution
of your BCD. On 29 September 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 one NUP, and a conviction by a
SPCM for being UA approximately three years. 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,

Wy Deas

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10

    Original file (05796-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03546-10

    Original file (03546-10.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 February 2011. On 13 November 1979, you were convicted at a special court-martial (SPCM) of being UA for 544 days. 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 | CY2011 | 02346-11

    Original file (02346-11.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 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4055 13

    Original file (NR4055 13.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 April 2014. On 7 November 1978, you were convicted by a second SPCM of 1,421 days of UA. 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 | 10690-10

    Original file (10690-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | 10658-10

    Original file (10658-10.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 20 October 1978, you received NIP for being UA for three days. 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 | CY2011 | 01866-11

    Original file (01866-11.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, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your lengthy period of UA from ‘the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01537-11

    Original file (01537-11.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, regulations, and policies. On 9 August 1973 you were ‘convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 27 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $408 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge {BCD}. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00903 12

    Original file (00903 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 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. On 28 October 1976, you received NUP for being UA for 20 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01165-11

    Original file (01165-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your record, however, does not reflect the court action or sentence for the foregoing charge. 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.