DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No: 04992-11
21 February 2012
,
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 15 February 2012. 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 had prior active duty service in the Marine Corps from 1962
to 1964, in which you received an honorable discharge. You
reenlisted on 5 August 1964, and served without disciplinary
incident until 18 July 1968, when you received nonjudicial
punishment for an unauthorized absence (UA) in excess of 11 days.
Shortly thereafter, you were in a UA status for approximately
nine months. You requested, through counsel to be separated in
lieu of a trial by court-martial. However, your request was
denied. On 25 August 1970, you were convicted at a special
court-martial (SPCM) of UA in excess of nine months. You were
sentenced to receive a bad conduct discharge (BCD); however, it
was suspended, but later vacated due to further misconduct.
Therefore, you were separated with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment
code due to your conviction at a SPCM. You received the BCD
after appellate review on 8 April 1971.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, mental state, prior honorable service, and your
Combat Action Ribbon for service in Vietnam. However, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your misconduct. 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,
Laon @ Je.
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04542-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. Furthermore, on 15 June 1965, you were convicted again at a SPCM of UA in excess of 32 days and of failing to obey a lawful order. 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 | CY2009 | 03531-09
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2] January 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 material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12237-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 2009. After appellate review, on 16 May 1969, you were separated from the naval service with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your conviction at your final SPCM. 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 | 04274-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2009. Shortly thereafter, you received NUP on 12 July 1963, for UA; on 24 July 1962, you were convicted at a summary court-martial for UA and failure to obey a lawful order; and on 19 December 1963, you received NUP for UA and failure to obey a lawful order or regulation by being outside of pounds without authority. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05244-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. Therefore, you were separated with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your conviction at a SPCM. 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 | CY2011 | 04537-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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. 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 | CY2002 | 10343-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. 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 26 October 1966 you were convicted by SPCM of a 67 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, a $342...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04538-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and claim that you were told that you were going to receive a medical discharge due to your condition of pseudophilicutitis; however, your claim is unsubstantiated. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01178-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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 | CY2008 | 01178-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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...