DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOAHD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7Ot S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BC
Docket No: 02911-14
6 November 2014
—— |
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval recora pursuant to tne provisions of titie 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 4 November 2014. 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 6 October 1988. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NIP) on three occasions. Your offenses were being in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status totaling six days, making
unauthorized phone calls, making a false official statement, and
wrongful use of cocaine. Onl December 1991, you were convicted
by a special court-martial (SPCM) of being UA for 37 days and
you were sentenced Forfeiture of $500, reduction in pay grade,
confinement at hard labor for 60 days, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). After appellate review you were Gischarged on
29 April 1994.
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 and assertion that the
discharge you received continues to hinder your life and
opportunities. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant. relief in your case because of
the seriousness of your repeated misconduct. Finally, there is
no evidence in the record, and you provided none, to support
your assertion. 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
materjal 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.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Fxecutive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3594 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on >@ October 2014. Vou submitted a written i request [or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial py court-martial for two additional periods of UA totaling over 40 days and.two instances of missing ship’s movement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant te demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6514 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0172 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2014. On 16 May 1969, you were again convicted by SPCM for two instances of UA from your unit totaling a period of 12 days and failure to go to 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR172 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 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 16 May 1969, you were again convicted by SPCM for two instances of UA from your unit totaling a period of 12 days and failure to go to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8410 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record, and: applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Shortly thereafter, on 25 September 1991, you began another period of UA that was not terminated until 28 January 1992, During the latter period of UA totalling 125 days, you were declared a deserter. Consequently, when applying - for a correction of an official -naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5235 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. The Board further concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when your request.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3342 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2586-13
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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7904 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. During this period of UA you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5588 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. Aithough the discharge documentation is mot in your record, it appears that you requested discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial...