DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 6268-10
16 March 2011
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 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 and began a period of active
duty on 24 February 1966 at age 17. On 4 April 1967, you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two instances of
unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period totaling 28
days. On 9 September 1968, you were convicted by special court-
martial (SPCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 334 days.
The sentence imposed was confinement for six months, forfe ture
of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD), however, the convening
authority suspended the BCD. On 8 January 1969, you were again
convicted by SPCM of UA from your unit for a period of 41 days.
The sentence imposed was confinement for three months and
forfeiture of pay. On 4 February 1969, you were again UA from
your unit until you were apprehended one 28 June 1969, by the
Federal Breaual of Investigation (FBI), in McClure, Pennsylvania,
a period of 138 days. The convening authority vacated the BCD
and on 5 September 1969, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in periods of UA totaling over one year and five months,
one SCM and two SPCMs. 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,
\SenSte
W. DEAN PF E
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08241-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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. On 25 November 1950, you were again convicted by SPCM of UA from your unit for a period of three days and sentenced to 30 days confinement, a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06291-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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 | 05129-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 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. Cofisequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08267-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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 | CY2001 | 04596-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. January 1968 you received NJP for a 14 day period of UA and were awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay. Given the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3300-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2014. On 8 July 1948, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of four days and: missing ‘ship's movement. The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentiaily mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07446-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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 | CY2008 | 09486-08
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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01386-10
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 24 February 1970 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 | 05297-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2011. On 29 July 1981, you were again convicted by SPCM of the forgoing period of UA and sentenced to 90 days confinement, forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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.