DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BIG
Docket No: 5168-13
29 April 2014
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 29 April 2014. 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. The Board also considered the report
of the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) dated 22 September
1972, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that 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 10 December 1969. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NTP) on two occasions and were convicted by a summary court-
martial (SCM) and a special court-martial (SPCM). Your offenses
included four periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 146
days, disrespect (two instances), and disobedience of a lawful
order. The sentence at your SPCM included a bad conduct
discharge (BCD), which was suspended for six months. However,
you received an NJP and SCM after the BCD was suspended, so it
was vacated. On 7 September 1971, after appellate review, you
received the BCD, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth,
allegation that NDRB concluded your discharge was too harsh, and
current desire to upgrade your discharge. However, the Board
concluded that your BCD should not be changed due to your
periods of UA that totaled more than four months and other
misconduct. Regarding your allegation, the Board noted that you
alleged your discharge was too harsh when it was reviewed by
NDRB. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded. due solely
to the passage of time or post service good conduct. In view of
the above, 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,
RS ao
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02645-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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 | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4500 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. Five months later, on 11 July 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 78 days, and was sentenced to a $530 forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement for two months and a suspended bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06381-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09
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 | CY2014 | NR067 14
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2014 The names and votes of tne 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 wit! Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01418-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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 25 June 1982 you began a period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04730-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 2011. On 17 July 1969 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totalling 123 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months 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...
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 | CY2009 | 11249-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 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...