DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370.5100
TRG
Docket No:
3 September 2003
2572-03
Your allegations of error and
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 Correctionof Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 August 2003.
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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You initially enlisted in the Navy on 21 December 1954 and served
until you were honorably discharged on 11 December 1958. At that
time, you were serving as a petty officer third class (BT3; E-4).
You reenlisted in the Navy on 9 March 1959.
During the period
from 24 April 1959 to 25 January 1963, you received nonjudicial
punishment on three occasions and were convicted by two special
courts-martial.
Your offenses included unauthorized absences of
3 days, 85 days, 18 days and 3 days.
The 85 and 18 day periods
were terminated only by your apprehension.
included two instances of drunkenness and disorderly conduct.
On 30 March 1963 you were convicted by civil authorities of lewd
and lascivious cohabitation and adultery.
The court sentenced
you to six months confinement, which was suspended.
special court-martial convened on 8 October 1963 and convicted
you of unauthorized absences of 28 and 114 days, both of which
were terminated by your apprehension.
The court sentenced you,
as mitigated,
to confinement at hard labor four for months.
The offenses also
A third
With your application, you have submitted
After review, the discharge authority directed an
Based on the foregoing record and your conviction by civil
authorities, you were processed for an administrative discharge.
In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the
right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board.
undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct and you were so
discharged on 13 December 1963.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors,
service; and your contention that because you are of American
Indian ancestry, you were especially susceptible to alcoholism
and blackouts which resulted in the misconduct in your second
enlistment.
documentation showing that you have maintained sobriety for many
years and are very active in helping others overcome the disease
of alcoholism.
The Board found that these factors and contentions were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
the frequency and serious of your misconduct.
The Board conceded
that the short periods of unauthorized absence could have
resulted from your alcoholism, but believed that at sometime
during the longer periods of unauthorized absence, especially
those of 85, 28 and 114 days,
you must have made knowing
decisions to remain absent.
Regulations state that alcohol abuse
is not an excuse for misconduct and disciplinary action is
appropriate following alcohol related misconduct.
Additionally
regulations do not preclude discharge processing of individuals
who are found to be alcohol dependent. Finally, the Board noted
that the lengthy periods of absence were terminated only by your
apprehension, indicating to the Board that you would have been an
absentee for even longer had you not been caught.
The Board
concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change
is warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board believes that you are eligible for veterans benefits
based on your prior honorable service.
been denied benefits you should appeal that denial under
procedures established by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
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.
such as your prior honorable
The names and
Therefore, if you have
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03334-01
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. confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeitures of $55 per months for six months, reduction in rate to EMFR (E-l), and a bad The convening authority approved the sentence conduct discharge. The Board noted the aggravating factor that each of the prolonged periods of UA were terminated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00113-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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. During the period from 15 December 1960 to 23 July 1962, you received three nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for two brief periods of UA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02325-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2005. 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 | CY2002 | 02238-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days, to On 3 August 1960 you received nonjudicial a $40 forfeiture of pay, and reduction on 6 May 1960, you were paygrade E-l. On 27 August and again on 8 October...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09591-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2003. 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 | CY2009 | 02411-09
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 upgrading your discharge given the six NJP’s, conviction by SCM and SPCM, two civil convictions, and your failure to attain the required average in conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07357-08
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 7 April 1959, you were so discharged. 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 00116-07
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 Marine Corps on 28 February 1959 at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01092 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. 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 15 October 1965, you were convicted by a SPCM of being UA for 113 days.