DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 1756-10
2 November 2010
Ce
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 2 November 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 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 October 1964. You received
nonjudicial punishment on two occasions and were convicted by a
special court-martial. You offenses included dereliction of
duty, and unauthorized absence (four specifications totaling 40
days). You served until 4 January 1969, when you were released
from active duty under honorable conditions and transferred to
the Marine Corps Reserve, and assigned and RE-4 (not
recommended for retention) reenlistment code.
On 26 November 1969, you pled guilty to assault with a deadly
weapon in Los Angeles, California, and were sentenced to
confinement for the term prescribed by law. You were notified
that your commanding officer was recommending you for
administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge due to misconduct. You exercised your procedural
right an administrative discharge board, which met and found
that you had committed misconduct and recommended an OTH
discharge. The separation authority agreed with the ADB’s
finding and recommendation, and you were so discharged.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, combat
service in Vietnam,. and current medical problems. The Board
Boncluded that your general discharge should not be upgraded
due to your acts of misconduct. 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.
ft 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,
INV.
W. DEAN P EF
Executive D or
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 | CY2009 | 03584-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. On 22 November 1968, you received NUP for UA from you appointed place of duty. On 28 May 1970 you were 8O discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05731-09
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. 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. On 3 April 1969 you began six periods of UA from your unit which totaled 348 days until you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06023-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02555-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01844-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2010. You elected to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB) that found you had committed misconduct (drug abuse), and recommended an under conditions OTH discharge. 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 | CY2011 | 04804-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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. On 25 June 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10058-09
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 29 September 1977, you received the OTH discharge for misconduct due to your 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 | CY2010 | 01922-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 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 | CY2009 | 11075-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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.