DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 2243-11
8 November 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 2 November 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 2 April 1980 at age 18 and
served without disciplinary incident until 5 August 1981, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to go to
your appointed place of duty. On 17 December 1981 you received
NIP for two specifications of disrespect.
On 17 February 1982 you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of a 24 day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and
breaching restraint from correctional custody. On 21 May 1982
you received your third NIP for two specifications of failure to
obey a lawful order. About two months later, on 19 July 1982 you
were convicted by SPCM of wrongful possession of marijuana and
unregistered firearms and ammunition. Although the record is
incomplete, it appears that you were sentenced to an unspecified
period of confinement and forfeitures, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). On 7 September 1982 the BCD was approved at all
levels of review, and on 16 February 1983, you were issued a BCD.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertion of inadequate and incompetent legal
representation. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient
to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the
seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which included drug
abuse, illegal possession of firearms, and a lengthy period of UA
from the Marine Corps. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08348-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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 | 10658-10
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 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 | CY2010 | 06575-10
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 | CY2009 | 01861-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2009. 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 | 05297-10
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10773-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other than honorable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03331-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 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. Your offenses were two specifications of disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, two periods of UA totalling two days, assault, and two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
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 | 08034-10
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 | 01449-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...