Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00165-12
Original file (00165-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

REC
Docket No: 00165-12
27 September 2012

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 September 2012. 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 28 July 1972. On 24 August
1973, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of
being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for 192 days. You
were sentenced to a forfeiture of $600, reduction in pay grade,
confinement at hard labor for three months, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). On 27 March 1974, you commenced another period
of UA which lasted 188 days. The discharge authority directed
the execution of your BCD. On 15 October 1974, 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 of
serious offenses which occurred during the Vietnam War.
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,

\y oo |
t
W. DEAN E

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03123-11

    Original file (03123-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. 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 | 03422-11

    Original file (03422-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct and your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA from the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09712 12

    Original file (09712 12.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 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 5 December 1975 you received your seventh NUP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a three day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05774-11

    Original file (05774-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2012. The Board found that during the period from 24 January to 18 September 1973, you received five nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for unauthorized absence (UA), two instances of wrongful possession of marijuana, introduction of marijuana onboard ship, six instances of being absent from your appointed place of duty, insubordinate conduct, disobedience,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00958-11

    Original file (00958-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 2 November 2011. On 27 February 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of being UA on three occasions totaling 1,082 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 | 04776-11

    Original file (04776-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 February 2012. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 05649 11

    Original file (05649 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 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...

  • 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04809-11

    Original file (04809-11.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 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. On 5 February 1976, you received NIP for UA from your unit for a period of two days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01873 12

    Original file (01873 12.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 27 January 1966, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 29 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.