DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 2638-14
6 April 2015
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 in a 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
25 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 Corp and began a period of active duty
on 14 March 1986. On 22 September 1987, you were convicted by
special court-martial (SPCM) of failing to go to your appointed
place of duty, disrespect, wrongful use of provoking words, and
larceny. As part of your sentence, you received a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). However, the convening authority suspended the
execution of it for 12 months. You were counseled and warned
that further misconduct could result in your discharge. On
19 January 1988, you began a period of unauthorized absence that
lasted four days, ending on 23 January 1988. Subsequently, a
vacation hearing was conducted and the BCD was vacated due to
your violation of probation, and order executed. You received
the BCD on 5 September 1988 after appellate review was completed.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service, medical needs and desire to upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, based on the information currently
contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your SPCM conviction, the fact that you warned of the
consequences of further misconduct, and given an opportunity for
retention and to earn a better characterization of service when
your BCD was suspended for 12 months. 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.
Singerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00406-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 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. The sentence included confinement, forfeitures of pay, reduction in rank, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4410 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04360-11
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. 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 | 03897-11
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 March 1975, the convening authority approved the sentence, but the BCD and a period of confinement at hard labor were suspended for six months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11249-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR5917 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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 | NR2642 14
© three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01873 12
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00807-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 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. # 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 | NR6797 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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...