DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ,
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 04100-09
11 March 2010
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 9 March 2010. 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 16 August 1967 at age 23. On 18 December 1967, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two days of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 26 March 1968, you were convicted
by special court-martial (SPCM) of 67 days of UA. You remained
on active duty and based on the information currently contained
in your record it appears that during the period from 13 April to
12 September 1970, you had two period of UA totaling 80 days. On
3 February 1971, you were convicted by civil authorities of
10 instances of forgery and sentenced to 18 months in prison. On
23 March 1971, you were notified of pending administrative
discharge action. You elected to consult with legal counsel and
requested an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 13 May
1971, an ADB found that you had committed misconduct due to civil
conviction and recommended that you be separated from the service
with an undesirable discharge due to unfitness. Subsequently,
your case was forwarded, and on 1 June 1976 the separation
authority approved the recommendation for an undesirable
discharge. You were so discharged on 1 June 1971.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your misconduct that resulted in NUP, civil conviction, and
ensuing incarceration for serious offenses. 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,
Lo Naas
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03761-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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 10 May 1971 an ADB recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00602-08
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. Furthermore, the Board noted that in addition to your civil conviction, you had an NJP and were convicted by a court-martial. 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 | CY2010 | 02157-10
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 30 January 1969, shortly after being released from confinement, you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended on 8 April 1969, On 19 May 1969 you were again UA for a three day. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07352-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2007. 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 | CY2008 | 07201-08
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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your prior period of honorable service, awards, and psychiatric evaluation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08213-00
your second request on 22 August 1966. Since you You were advised of your _ An enlisted performance evaluation board was convened in the Bureau of Naval Personnel on 23 March 1967 and recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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 | CY2009 | 04231-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 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 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 | CY2002 | 03910-02
November 1973 you were convicted by SPCM of four periods of UA totalling 566 days. On 10 April 1974 the discharge authority directed period of UA. an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02720-09
_ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03848-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...