Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6791 13
Original file (NR6791 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

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

 

BJG
Docket No: 6791-13
28 July 2014

 

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 23 July 2014. 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 that 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 21 February 1985. You received nonjudicial punishment on
three occasions and were convicted by a special court-martial
(SPCM). Your offenses included sleeping on post as a sentry,
willfully disobeying a lawful order, disrespect (three
instances), driving with revoked privileges, using provoking
words, assault (three instances), and communicating a threat.

The sentence at your SPCM included a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
On 16 October 1989, after appellate review, you received the ECD.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and

' allegation that you were in a coma at the time of your
discharge. However, the Board concluded that your BCD should
not be changed due to your numerous acts of serious misconduct.
Regarding your allegation, there is no evidence in your record
to support it, and you provided no such evidence. You are
advised that no discharge is upgraded due solely to the passage
of time or post service good conduct. In view of the above,

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,

9D I

ROBERT DBD. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6608 13

    Original file (NR6608 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 8 July 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR6614 13

    Original file (NR6614 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 9 July 2014. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR6668 13

    Original file (NR6668 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 15 July 2014. 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 8 April 1989, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6622 13

    Original file (NR6622 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 16 July 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR6620 13

    Original file (NR6620 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    your SPCM included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). However, the Board concluded that your BCD should not be changed due to your serious acts of misconduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR6254 13

    Original file (NR6254 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 10 June 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR7585 13

    Original file (NR7585 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 12 August 2014. The sentence at your second SPCM included 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 | CY2013 | NR6771 13

    Original file (NR6771 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 9 July 2014. 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 18 November 1981 after three years of prior honorable service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6347 13

    Original file (NR6347 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 17 June 2014. The sentence at your SPCM included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 24 August 1976, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5358 13

    Original file (NR5358 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 14 May 2014. The sentence at your SPCM included 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.