Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09712 12
Original file (09712 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7001S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TIR
Docket No: 9712-12
23 October 2012

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 16 October 2012. 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.

Bfter 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 26 October 1972 at age 17 and
immediately began a period of active duty. You served without
disciplinary incident until 24 April 1974, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to obey a lawful order.
On 5 September 1974 you received NUP for wrongful possession of
Marijuana.

During the period from 9 January to 13 May 1975 you received NUP
on three more occasions for five periods of absence from your
appointed place of duty and two specifications of failure to obey
a lawful order. You were also in an unauthorized absence (UA)
status for approximately 29 days, specifically, from 10 April to
9 March 1975, but no disciplinary action was taken for this
misconduct. On 8 August 1975 you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of attempting to escape from custody and a
12 day period of UA. Less than two months later, on 15 October
1975, you were again convicted by SPCM of a 23 day period of UA.
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 90 days and a
bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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. Subsequently , the
BCD was approved at all levels of review and on 15 April 1976 you
were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct and desire to have your
discharge upgraded to general so that your right to bear arms and
vote can be restored. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which
also included drug abuse, and lengthy periods of UA from the
Marine Corps that resulted in seven NJPs and two courts-martial
convictions. 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,
Te GS
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN

 

Acting Executive Director

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 | 13157 11

    Original file (13157 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 August 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. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your serious...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02717-11

    Original file (02717-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. You requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00919-08

    Original file (00919-08.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 December 2008. 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 | 02723-11

    Original file (02723-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 03362-11

    Original file (03362-11.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 | CY2010 | 03737-10

    Original file (03737-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, ‘together with all material submitted in support thereof, your deceased husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Confequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08942-08

    Original file (08942-08.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 July 2009. 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 06582-09

    Original file (06582-09.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 June 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 30 May 1975 you received NUP for a 16 day period of UA.