DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51600
BUG
Docket No: 10070-08
22 July 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 22 July 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 and medical records,
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 entered active
duty in the Marine Corps on 1 March 1972. You were in an
unauthorized absence status on three occasions, totaling about
186 days, but no disciplinary action was taken. On
26 April 1973, you were convicted by civilian authorities of
armed robbery, and were sentenced to six months confinement.
On 27 June 1973, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action for misconduct due to your civilian
conviction. You requested an administrative discharge board
(ADB), which recommended that you be separated with an. other
than honorable (OTH) discharge for misconduct based on your
armed robbery conviction. On 5 October 1973, the separation
authority agreed with the ADB’s recommendation. On
19 October 1973, you received an OTH discharge for misconduct,
and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record,. carefully
weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and family
problems. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your OTH discharge
because of your long periods of UA and civilian conviction. In
“view of the above, 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,
BID
W. DEAN P R
Executive ractor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03204-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2010. Shortly thereafter, on 19 December 1973, you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities and charged with armed robbery. On 6 March 1974, while in custody of civil authorities, you were you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to the civil conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12021-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. The Board concluded that your discharge should not be upgraded due to your very serious acts of misconduct , | The Board found that you waived your right Bto ‘an-ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better $characterizaGMBn" of Service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05837 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2012. Finally, members of the armed services who are convicted by civil authorities may be discharged for misconduct. 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 | CY2008 | 09625-08
A three-member panel’ of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2009. 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 17 June 1976, the discharge authority directed that you be separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of civil conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8155 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6679 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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. 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 | NR6746 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4391 13
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 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 | CY2002 | 06453-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. the disciplinary action taken, paygrade E-l and a $50 forfeiture of However, the record does not reflect if any, for these periods of UA. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00061-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Subsequently, the discharge authority concurred with the ADB and directed that you receive an undesirable discharge due to misconduct on the...