DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 1171-14
13 March 2015
bear Sas
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,
Although your application was not filed ina timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on .
4 March 2015. 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 and began a period of active
duty on 25 February 1980. You served for two months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period of 5 May to
29 December 1980, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on
_two occasions. Your offenses were insubordinate conduct and
failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On 31 July 1981,
you were convicted by special court-martial {(SPCM) of an attempt
to steal marijuana and theft of $20. The sentence imposed was
confinement, a forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade and a
bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 7 September 1982, you received
the BCD after appellate review was complete.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.
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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in your case. 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.
Sin ely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0921 14
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. for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR870 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR7235 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2015. 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 were also convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of 284 days of UA and sentence to forfeitures of pay, confinement for 60 days, reduction to pay grade...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6338 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR7182 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR4498 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2015. 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. Although your BCD discharge was suspended for nine months on 25 June 1981, this suspension was vacated due to your continued misconduct, which...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR850 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. Asa ceault of this action, on 5 August 1980, you were convicted by SPCM of 328 day period of UA, and the suspended BCD was then remitt d. Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all levels of review, and on 24 November 198C yOu were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12070 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015.. Asa result, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to drug under other ‘than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, which was in direct Gisregard to the Navy's ‘Zero Tolerance’ Policy, and conviction by civil authorities for possession of marijuana. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5880 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2015. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your case. 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 | CY2014 | NR12070 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015. 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application with supporting documentation, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,...