DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51700 REC
Docket No: 12082-09
12 August 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 11 August 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 ali 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 1 August 1968. On 2% October 1968, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to go to your appointed
place of duty. On 5 December 1968, you received NJP for being in
an unauthorized absence (UA) status for 20 days. On 24 January
1969, you were convicted at a special court-martial (SPCM) of
being UA for 14 days, failure to obey a lawful order and being
disrespectful in language. You were sentenced to forfeitures of
$300, reduction in pay grade and confinement at hard labor for 30
days. On 25 September 1963, you were convicted by a SPCM of
being UA for 23 days. You were sentenced to forfeitures of $90,
and 30 days restriction. Between 22 January 1970 and 30 October
1973, you received three additional NJP’s. You committed the
following offenses: UA on three occasions, and disobeying a
lawful order by driving your privately owned vehicle with revoked
privileges. On 14 August 1974, you were convicted by your third
SPCM of being UA 48 days, missing the movement of your battalion,
being disrespectful toward a senior commissioned officer,
disobeying a lawful order, and assaulting a fellow Marine. You
were sentenced to reduction in pay grade and 30 days confinement
at hard labor. On 5 October 1974, you commenced a period of UA
which lasted 396 days. Upon your return, you submitted a written
request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for a period of UA totaling over 13
months. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you
conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your
rights, and were warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. Your request for discharge was
“Granted and on 10 February 1976, you received an other than
#honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. As a
miresult of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-
“#martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
i ocnarse : and : confinement at hard labor.
% he agp
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
overali record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in six
NJP's and three SPCM convictions. 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, a
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 | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08496-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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 ali material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10677-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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 | CY2010 | 09065-10
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 28 February 1974, you received NUP for a seven day UA period. 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 | CY2012 | 00456 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. On 28 September 1965, you received NJP for being UA for seven days. In this regard, the Board noted that you admitted to participating in homosexual acts under aggravating circumstances by receiving compensation.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00325-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC Docket No: 00325-09 9 November 2009 This is in reference to your application for correction of your . 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 27 November 1981, you received NJP for another period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02100-09
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 materiai 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10773-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other than honorable discharge.