DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
REC
Docket No: 04055-12
28 February 2013
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 27 February 2013. 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 5 October 1982, at age 18.
On 27 February 1985, you were convicted by a special court-
martial (SPCM) of being in an unauthorized absence status on two
occasions totaling 220 days and wrongfully distributing 25 doses
of lysergic acid diethylamide. You were sentenced to a
forfeiture of $1,170, reduction in pay grade, confinement at
hard labor for three months, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
Your misconduct continued and on 31 May 1985, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for being UA for 53 days. The
discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. On 19
March 1986, 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 an NUP and conviction by a
SPCM of serious offenses. 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,
Fxecutive Dwreyto
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
REC
Docket No: 04062-12
28 February 2013
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 27 February 2013. 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, his 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 and began a period of active
duty on 16 November 1973, at age 17. On 9 May 1975, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being absent from your
appointed place of duty and disobeying a lawful order. On 18
September 1975, you received NUP for sleeping on post. On 22
and 24 September 1975, you received NUP for breaking
restriction. On 8 January 1976, you received NUP for being
absent from your appointed place of duty. On 11 February 1976,
you were convicted by a special court-marital (SPCM) of being in
an unauthorized absence (UA) status for four days. You were
sentenced to a forfeiture of $100. On 2 March 1976, you
received NUP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
On 8 March 1976, administrative separation procedures were
initiated. On 17 March 1976, you were discharged with a general
characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of his entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. However, the Board found that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant any change in your characterization of
service given your record of six NUP’s and a conviction by a
SPCM of misconduct. The Board also noted that you were
fortunate to receive a general discharge since a separation
under other than honorable conditions is often directed when an
individual is found to have committed misconduct. 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,
Executive DYr or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04062-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, his 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 | 02723-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00035-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 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. You requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05198-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. You submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00151-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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 | CY2012 | 00903 12
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 | CY2010 | 01186-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. On 4 February 1976, the discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07251-10
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 29 December 1975, you received NUP for being UA for three days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08359-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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 3 January 1977, you received NJP for an unknown period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08402-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. On 30 August 1985, you received NUP for willful destruction of military property and being absent 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.