DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 2157-10
14 January 2011
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 11 January 2011. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will 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 probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 23 February 1966 at age 17
and served for about eight months without disciplinary incident.
However, on 30 September 1966, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NIP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence
(UA) .
On 25 November 1968 you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of a 34 day period of UA and were sentenced to reduction
to paygrade E-1, a $100 forfeiture of pay, and confinement at
hard labor for two months. 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. period
which also terminated when you were apprehended. About three
months later, on 17 August 1969, you were in a UA status for 140
days. This period of UA was terminated on 7 January 1970 when
you were apprehended and held in confinement.
On 8 January 1970 you were again UA, and during this period of UA
you were apprehended by civil authorities on 18 March 1970 at
which time you were charged with drunk and disorderly conduct.
You were apprehended by civil authorities on 24 March 1970 and
charged with forgery and uttering bad checks. Subsequently, you
were released on a $12,000 bond. ,On 8 September 1970 you were
apprehended and held in confinemeht by civil authorities pending
wan investigation regarding the charges of forgery and uttering
kad checks. It appears that on 2 December 1970 you were released
from civil custody, and as such terminating a 324 day period of
However, on 21 December 1970, you were in a UA status for a
0 day period which was not terminated until you were apprehended
on 11 February 1971.
On 5 May 1972, while in a UA status since 27 February 1972, you
were convicted by civil authorities of forgery and sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for two years or to pay a $2,000 fine.
On 27 December 1972, while in civil custody, you were notified of
pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to
conviction by civil authorities. After consulting with legal
counsel you elected your right to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 15 March 1973 an ADB
recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due
to civil conviction. Subsequently, the discharge authority
directed your commanding officer to issue you an undesirable
discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. On 9
April 1973 you were so discharged, thus terminating a 764 day
period of UA.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, combat service, and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct in both the
military and civilian communities which resulted in an NUP, and
conviction by both military and civil authorities. Finally, the
Board noted that your frequent and lengthy periods of UA, which
totalled approximately 1,387 days, all terminated when you were
apprehended, and that you received no disciplinary action for
this misconduct. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12307-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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 | CY2005 | 00576-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. 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 | CY2007 | 08162-07
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 Naval Reserve on 28 December 1979 at age 20 and began a period of active duty on...
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 | 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 | CY2007 | 09234-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11222-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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. On 13 January 1971 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05792-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 May 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7912 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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. On 6 July 1972 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) ' of a 570 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four...