DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 07751-07
11 August 2008
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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 July 2008. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 30
January 1967. You were convicted by special court-martial on 25
June 1969 of a lengthy period of unauthorized absence, and
writing eleven bad checks. Upon your release from confinement,
you were absent without authority from 11 September 1969 to 1
November 1969. On 6 February 1970, you were convicted by
special court-martial unauthorized absence and four
specifications of wrongfully appropriating property of other
Marines. You were sentenced to be discharged from the Marine
Corps with a bad conduct discharge. While awaiting review of
the conviction and sentence, you were arrested by Japanese
authorities and charged with multiple acts of larceny and fraud.
On 4 December 1970, you stated that you did not want to be
restored to duty, and formally requested that your bad conduct
discharge be executed. You were separated from the Marine Corps
with a bad conduct discharge on 24 February 1971, upon
completion of appellate review. On 30 June 2007, the Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA) determined that your service in the
Marine Corps was dishonorable for VA purposes.
The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for further
service by reason of physical disability at the time of your
discharge. In addition, it concluded that your service was
properly characterized with a bad conduct discharge, given your
extensive record of misconduct. It noted that you would not have
been entitled to disability separation or retirement even if you
had been unfit for duty, because your bad conduct discharged
-would have taken precedence over disability processing.
Accordingly, and as you have not demonstrated that it would be
in the interest of justice for the Board to upgrade your
discharge as a matter of clemency, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request.
If you are in need of medical, you should consider contacting
the VA, which notified you on 30 July 2007 that you are eligible
for health care and related benefits for any disability or
disabilities incurred or aggravated in the line of duty during
any period of active service.
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,
\ Souk
W. DEAN PF
Executive Digxe r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10496-06
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 1 May 1967. The court sentenced you to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09595-07
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 on 21 December 1966 at age 17. The punishment imposed was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08092-06
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 on 8 October 1969 at age 17. However, your request was denied and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08600-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2007. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, on 17 November 1969 you received your sixth NUP for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days. The record further reflects that on 1...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00780-03
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs, a SCM conviction for a lengthy period of unauthorized absence, and the civil conviction for drug possession. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03984-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2013. On 20 June 1970, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of willfully disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer and two incidents of assaulting a fellow Marine. 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 | CY2002 | 04976-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The punishment imposed was 15 days of extra (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed On 30 July 1969 you received NJP for a 15 day period of unauthorized absence from 23 June to 8 July 1969. The punishment imposed was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04030-07
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
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...