Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01873 12
Original file (01873 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TAL
Docket No: 1873-12
5 December 2012

 

This igs 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 28 November 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 8 January 1964 at age 18. On 15 September 1965 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for unauthorized absence
(UA) from your unit. On 27 January 1966, you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of
29 days. On 31 August 1966, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of UA from your unit for a period of

27 days. The sentence imposed was confinement, and a forfeiture
of pay. On 11 January and 7 February 1967, you received NJP for
failure to obey a lawful regulation and failure to go to
appointed place of duty. On 11 July 1967, you were convicted by
SPCM of UA from your unit for a period of 43 days. The sentence
imposed was confinement, a forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). The reviewing authority suspended the BCD for
a period of six months. On 30 October 1967, you were again UA
from your unit for a period of 94 days, until you surrendered to
civilian authorities in Saginaw, Michigan, on 1 February 1968.
On 15 March 1968, the separation authority vacated your
suspended BCD, and on 25 March 1968, you were 50 discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, Vietnam
service 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 three NJPs, a SCM, two SPCMs
and periods of UA totaling over six months. Finally, although
the BCD was suspended for six months, it was vacated due to your
continued 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,

. Wadia enate Daw bets
‘wy Naaaar id

Executive Ditect

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09486-08

    Original file (09486-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 04258-02

    Original file (04258-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 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. .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 | 06268-10

    Original file (06268-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 05868-01

    Original file (05868-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09

    Original file (04679-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 | CY2007 | 10683-07

    Original file (10683-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.On 19 January 1966, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 20. On 19 July 1966, you began an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06291-10

    Original file (06291-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | 10683-07

    Original file (10683-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 June 1967, while on ‘probation, you began a UA that ended about 187 days later when you surrendered. On 9 February 1968, the suspended sentence was vacated and the BCD was ordered executed. On 16 February 1968, you were discharged with a BCD.