DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
REC
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
Docket No: 04417-10
2 February 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 2 February 2011. 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 13 January 1969, at age 18.
On 2 March 1970, you surrendered to civilian authorities for a
charge of first degree murder. On 15 May 1970, you were
convicted by a civilian criminal court of manslaughter. You were
sentenced to confinement between three and 15 years. You were
notified that your command was processing you for administrative
separation with undesirable discharge (UD) due to misconduct.
You exercised your procedural right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 12 February 1971, your
case was heard by an ADB, which voted unanimously in favor of a
UD due to misconduct. Your commanding officer concurred with the
ADB’s recommendation and forwarded his recommendation that you
receive a UD by reason of misconduct. On 24 March 1971, you
received the UD due to misconduct. At that time you were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and the fact that you surrendered to civilian
authorities. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in a civilian
criminal conviction and confinement. 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 pts decision upon submission of new and material
. evidence pr other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard’ it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption ofsregularity 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,
i) None F
Executive redtor
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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04436-10
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 17 April 1986, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (commission of a serious offense). ‘Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
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 | CY2010 | 10654-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 2011. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06634-08
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. On 1 August 1973, you were released from civilian confinement and returned to military authorities. 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 | CY2008 | 07357-08
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. On 7 April 1959, you were so discharged. 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 | 08334-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2011. On 5 April 1974, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. Consedhent Ly, 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 | 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 | 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...