DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SUN
Docket No: 06969-08
22 May 2009
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 19 May 2009. 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 30 June 1972 at age 24. During the period from
12 December 1972 to 2 February 1973 you received three
nonjudicial punishments (NUP’s) for three periods of unauthorized
absence (UA) totaling 20 days, wearing utilities off base, and
eating in the chow hall without paying while receiving a meal
allowance. On 8 March 1973, you were convicted by summary court-
martial (SCM) of three periods of UA totaling about six days. On
18 April 1973, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM)
of eight days of UA. You were sentenced to confinement at hard
labor.
On 26 April 1973, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
You elected to consult with legal counsel] and subsequently
requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 13 July 1973, an ADB unanimously found that you had committed
misconduct due to frequent involvement, and recommended an
undesirable discharge due to unfitness. Your commanding officer
concurred with the ADB and forwarded your case to the discharge
authority for review. On 25 July 1973, the discharge authority
directed an undesirable discharge due to unfitness. You were so
discharged on 26 July 1973.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your
discharge because of the three NUP’s, and convictions by a SCM
and a SPCM. 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,
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12499 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 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 | CY2010 | 10254-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 2011. 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 | CY2009 | 01298-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. , 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 of injustice. Your request for discharge was granted and on 19 December 1972, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11117-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07244-08
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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an undesirable discharge (UD) and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09154-04
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 13 July 1970 at age 17 and served for a year without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09930-09
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 6 July 1973, you received NUP for being UA for a period of 15 days. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an other than honorable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06130-10
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 25 September and 28 November 1972 your command received two letters of indebtedness resulting from your failure to pay just debts. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11339-07
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. On 15 November 1968 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 64 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for three months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4905 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2014. 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...