DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7Ot S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TJR
Docket No: 2573-13
4 February 2014
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 4 February 2014. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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, regulatiqns, 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 12 April 1961. You served without disciplinary incident
until 18 July 1962, when you were convicted by summary court-
martial (SCM) of a 23 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
In February 1963 you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of a 69 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at
hard labor for three months and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all levels of review, and
on 26 June 1963, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its. review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertions that your
punishment did not fit the offense for which you were discharged
and that you believe that you were made an example of, which
resulted in a discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive and
lengthy periods of UA. Finally, there is no evidence in the
record, and you provided none, to support your assertions.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
Tene SD. Cn
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03797-06
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 Navy on 15 August 1963 after three years of prior honorable service and served...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00712-08
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 9 April 1964, you were returned to military authorities after being in a UA status for about 120 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 error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02609-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. On 10 October 1962, you received NJP for UA from your unit.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2623-13
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 December 1969 you: submitted a written request for immediate execution of the BCD, stating in.part,.that you were of no use to the Navy since you. for a correction of an official naval -record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the - existence of probable material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2586-13
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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11227-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5247 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 8S. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2014. 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 | CY2006 | 11044-06
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 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0172 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2014. On 16 May 1969, you were again convicted by SPCM for two instances of UA from your unit totaling a period of 12 days and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. 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 | CY2014 | NR172 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2014. 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 16 May 1969, you were again convicted by SPCM for two instances of UA from your unit totaling a period of 12 days and failure to go to...