DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 2243-09
27 January 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 20 January 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panei wiil 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 probabie material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 27 July 1972 at age 17 and served
without disciplinary incident until 6 October 1973, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for misbehavior as a
Sentinel/lookout. Shortly thereafter, on 25 October 1973, you
received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order and disorderly
conduct in public.
On 15 January 1974 you began a period of unauthorized absence
(UA) that was terminated when you were apprehended by civil
authorities on charges of transporting a rental car across the
State line/automobile grand theft. The charge was held in
abeyance and on 18 January 1974 you were returned to military
custody. However, on 4 February 1974 you began another period of
UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil
authorities on 16 January 1975 on the charge of burglary in the
first degree. On 18 March 1975 you were convicted by civil
authorities of the foregoing charge and sentenced to probation
for five years. On 21 March 1975 you were returned to military
custody.
On 29 April 1975 you were convicted by special court-martial
{(SPCM) of a 410 day period of UA. You were sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a $450 forfeiture of
pay, reduction to pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all levels of review and on
26 June 1975, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge, and assertion that
you went UA because of riots, drinking, and not getting along
with your superiors. Nevertheless, these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct in both the
military and civilian communities. Finally, there is documented
evidence in the record which is contrary to your assertion.
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 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,
Nes Rely
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00919-08
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. 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 | 06140-10
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 9 July 1975 you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended and held in custody by Civil authorities on 3 November 1975. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
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 | CY2010 | 01411-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 2010. 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 policise. 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 | 03946-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The record reflects that there was no disciplinary action taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00917-08
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. On 5 December 1975 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to conviction by civil authorities.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03685-10
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. 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. As a result of the foregoing, on 18 December 1974, you submitted a written request for an other...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03358-11
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 1 November 1973 you began another period of UA totalling that was not terminated until 10 March 1977. 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 | CY2011 | 01165-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your record, however, does not reflect the court action or sentence for the foregoing charge. 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 | CY2011 | 01866-11
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. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your lengthy period of UA from ‘the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...