ee nee DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS a
701 S. COURTHOUDE ROAD. SUITE 2001
cle
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 8403-13
6 November 2014
pear (a
This is in reference to yo
late husband's naval record pursuant to
10, United States Code, Section 1552.
ur application for correction of your
the provisions of Title
1 of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 28 October 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
A three-member pane
material submitted in support thereof,
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 OF
injustice.
e Corps and began a period of
your husband enlisted in the Marin
He served for eight months
active duty on 28 November 1967.
without disciplinary incident, put on 19 duly 1968, he received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for being absent from his appointed
place of duty. During the period from 9 November 1972 to 10 May
1974 your husband was convicted, on three occasions, by special
court-martial (SPcM} of disobedience and three periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 173 days.
On 26 duiy 1974, at the expiration of your husband’s enlistment,
he was discharged under honorable conditions. At that time
character of service was based, in part, on conduct and
proficiency averages which were computed from marks assigned
during periodic evaluations. His conduct average was 3.0,
however, an average of 4.0 in conduct was required for a fully
honorable characterization of service,
sband’s entire record and your
The Board, in its review of your hu
mitigating factors,
application carefully weighed all potentially
such as your desire to upgrade his discharge, and assertion that
he was suffering the effects of the Vietnam war. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
vecharacterization of your husband’s discharge because of his
repeated and lengthy periods of UA which resulted in three SPCMs,
and since his conduct average was insufficiently hign to warrant
a fully honorable characterization of service. Further, a fully
honorable characterization of service is not authorized if a
Marine is convicted by more than one SPCM. Finally, there is no
evidence in the record, and your submitted none to support your
assertion. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
ces of your case are such that
Tt is regretted that the circumstan
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously congidered 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
ROBER :
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07609-10
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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such the Board noted...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4660 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given-your NUP, SPCM conviction, and failure to attain the required average in conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08034-08
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. About six months later, on 30 December 1966 you received NUP for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and disorderly conduct.
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 | NR4632 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2014. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to have been retained on active duty to earn a better characterization of service after your second SPCM for a very lengthy period of UA. 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 | CY2004 | 06867-04
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 27 December 1973 at age 17. You were sentenced to reduction to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR818 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, requlations, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00043-06
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 13 October 1969 at age 18. Subsequently, you were issued a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08848-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 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 | 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...