DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TLG
Docket No: 5917-14
3 June 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. The application was filed in
a timely manner.
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
2 June 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 18 January 1984. During the period from 9 July 1984 to
1 January 1987, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NUP)
for 11 days of unauthorized absence, failure to go to your
appointed place of duty, and disobeying a lawful and written
order. You were also convicted by a special court-martial
(SPCM) of writing bad checks and sentence to forfeitures of
$1,200, confinement for 120 days, reduction to pay grade E-1l,
and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After the BCD was approved
at all levels of review, on 27 July 1988, you were discharged.
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
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief
given your misconduct as evidenced by three NPJs and SPCM
conviction. 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 ¢ase. 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. "NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7366 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 2015. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your three NJP’s, two of which were for wrongful drug use, and SPCM conviction for a period of UA that lasted over three months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6342 14
aA 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 | NR7371 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7490 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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 | NR1929 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. On 15 August 1988, you received a BCD after appellate review was complete.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5425 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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. Your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3849 14
a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision 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 | NR5108 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 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. On 22 May 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 79 day period of UA and sentenced to a $97 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, confinement...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6366 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 | 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...