DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 ,
SIN
Docket No: 1293-14
12 March 2015
Dear Sy
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.
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its’merits. A .
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
24 February 2015. 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, 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 4 August 1966. on 19 January 1967, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for seven days of unauthorized
absence (UA). On 22 August 1967, you were convicted by civil
authorities of child molestation. You were sentenced to serve
two years of probation and a fine. Based on this conviction you
were processed for an administrative discharge by reason of
misconduct due to civil conviction. on i March 1968, you were
notified of this pending administrative separation action. After
being afforded all of your procedural rights, your case was
forwarded to the separation authority recommending your
separation. The separation authority concurred and you were so
discharged on 20 March 1968.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not —
sufficient to warrant any change in your discharge given your
civil conviction of a very serious offense. 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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously. considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in your case. 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,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1998 14
A ‘three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2015. ~ 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. ' In this regard, you submitted a request for a general discharge based on your overall record of service, -However,; an ADB and your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5108 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2015. 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 22 May 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 79 day period of UA and sentenced to a $97 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, confinement...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4014 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2015. 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 | NR604 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. 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 request for discharge was granted and on 3 March 1970, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07446-05
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 Navy on 7 September 1966 at age 17 and served for over a year without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2106 14
Naval Records; sitting in executive session, considered your application on |. 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 .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11639-10
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. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02720-09
_ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01694-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2012. 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 | NR2085 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. However, two months later, on 26 August 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 60 day 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.