DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 4944-14
27 April 2015
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
22 April 2015. The names and votes of the member 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on
11 September 1972. You served for a month without disciplinary
incident, but during the period from 16 November 1972 to
23 August 1983, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on five
occasions. Your offenses were larceny, assault, failure to obey
a lawful order, insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned
officer and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On
7 November 1973, you were convicted by special court-martial of
larceny. The sentence imposed was a confinement at hard labor
and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 6 August 1974, you
received the BCD after appellate review was complete.
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. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.
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 | NR657 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3609 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 oF injustice. 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 | CY1999 | 06848-09
“BR three-member panei of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. On 28 September 1971 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of larceny of $80, the property of another Marine. 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 | 06848-09
“BR three-member panei of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2010. On 28 September 1971 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of larceny of $80, the property of another Marine. 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 | NR4860 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7268 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2360 14
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 | CY2014 | NR5554 14
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7912 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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 6 July 1972 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) ' of a 570 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12036 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2015. 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 assertion that you were found guilty of only one theft. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...