DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TLG
Docket No: 6359-14
7 May 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
1 May 2015. 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
18 November 1974. You served for about five months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from
30 April 1975 to 3 February 1976, you received five nonjudicial
punishments (NJP), were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM), and civil authorities on three occasions. Your offenses
were four periods of absence from your appointed place of duty,
unauthorized absence for 32 days, fleeing the scene of an
accident, unlawful possession of alcoholic beverages, petty
theft, receiving stolen property, disorderly conduct, and
prowling.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to civil |
conviction. After waiving your procedural rights, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civil
conviction. The discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed separation under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct and on
7 April 1976, 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 to honorable.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant upgrading your characterization of service
given your misconduct as evidenced by five NJPs, SPCM, and three
civil convictions. 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
applying for correction of an official naval record, the burden
is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of the probable
material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director
ee = eee — _ aac
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6379 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement with civilian and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03724-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Board. On 21 June 1973 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of breaking restriction and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a $75 forfeiture of pay. On 25 May 1976 the discharge authority...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5645 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2015. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, desire to upgrade your discharge, and your assertion that you suffered a traumatic head injury while serving in the Marine Corps. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02989-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2001. 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. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03910-02
November 1973 you were convicted by SPCM of four periods of UA totalling 566 days. On 10 April 1974 the discharge authority directed period of UA. an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4009 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 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. 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 | NR7562 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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 your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01317-04
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable materialThe Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 26 June 1976, and commenced 36 months of active duty on 30...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05223-07
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 9 October 1975 at age 21. Additionally, you were counseled and warned...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4993 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...