DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 7393-07
1 February 2008
This is in reference to your application for correction of your r
late husband’s naval record pursuant to the provisions of title
10 of the United States Code section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correctinn of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 30 January 2008. Your allegations of erro? anc
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 husband’s 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.
The Board found that your husband enlisted in the Marine Corps on
14 November 1962. He received two nonjudicial punishments and
was convicted by summary and special courts-martial. His
offenses included unauthorized absences and failure to obey a
lawful order. On 7 October 1966 he made a sworn statement in
which he admitted to drug use and having engaged in homosexual
acts with civilians.
On 10 April 1967 an administrative discharge board recommended
that your husband be separated from the Marine Corps by reason of
unfitness, with an undesirable discharge. He was discharged on 12
May 1967 in accordance with the approved recommendation of the
administrative discharge board.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your husband’s service in
Vietnam, his receipt of the Purple Heart, and the fact that you
would be entitled to a burial flag if your request is granted.
The Board concluded that those factors are insufficient to
warrant recharacterization of his service, given the
circumstances of his discharge, his extensive prior disciplinary
record, and his admitted use of illegal drugs. Accordingly, 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01973-07
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. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 4 April 1967 he received an undesirable discharge. 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 | CY2008 | 06552-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 May 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband’s naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. His request for discharge was approved by the separation authority, and he received an undesirable discharge on 3 March 1970.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00532-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 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. 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 | NR818 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, requlations, 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08384-07
On 12 December 1984, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse. On 26 December 1984 your late husband was. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of his discharge because of the frequency of his misconduct, as shown by the two NJP’s, one of which was for drug use, the SPCM conviction for drug use, and his failure to adhere to his command’s drug rehabilitation program.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08384-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s 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.Your late husband reenlisted in the Navy on 8 December 1982 after more than three years...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00575-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11738-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02600-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 14 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. He was On 24 March 1970, your husband was convicted by summary martial of an unauthorized absence from 12 February to 2 March 1970. court-martial, 46 days of unauthorized absence and his extensive in-service drug usage supported his...