DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
OP Fie
PEM
T\
TAL
Docket No: 5837-11
9 March 2012
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 7 March 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 31 October 1973 after more
than two years of prior honorable service. In May 1975 you were
convicted in a Superior Court of California in San Diego of armed
robbery. The sentence imposed was confinement for six months and
four years probation. You were notified of pending
administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable
(OTH) Gischarge due to misconduct. You waived all of your
procedural rights, including your right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 22 January 1976, you received the OTH
discharge for misconduct (civil conviction).
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and prior
honorable 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 a civil conviction. Finally, members of the armed services
who are convicted by civil authorities may be discharged for
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,
Read
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05854 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 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 | CY2012 | 00904 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. On 31 January 1983, you were again UA for 20 days with no disciplinary action taken by your chain of command. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04023-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04071-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 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. Finally, members of the armed services who are convicted by civil authorities may be discharged for misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4351 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a ‘civil conviction and that you were no longer qualified for submarine service... The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since Sailors who are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04085-11
| A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your > application on 25 January 2012. 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 a civil conviction, an NJP and two SCMs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01067 12
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. Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05822-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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 | CY2011 | 04786-11
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. 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 | CY2012 | 01089 12
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 August and 3 september 1986, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...