DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMW
Docket No: 2717-05
24 October 2005
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 Correction of Naval Records, sitting
in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2005. 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 on 15 July 1964 at the age of 20. During the
period from 7 April 1965 to 9 November 1967 you received four nonjudicial
punishments (NJP’s) for disrespect, two instances of unauthorized absence
(UA) totaling about 35 days, and possession of two liberty cards.
Additionally, on two occasions, suspended punishments from these NJP’s
were vacated due to continued misconduct.
On 9 November 1967 you began a period of UA that ended on 22 May 1968, a
period of about 195 days. On 19 June 1968 a special court-martial (SPCM)
convicted you of this UA, and the court sentenced you to six months of
confinement at hard labor, $540 in forfeitures of pay, reduction to pay
grade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After the BCD was approved
at all levels of review, the unexecuted confinement and forfeitures were
remitted, and on 12 November 1968 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully
weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your service in
Vietnam, and your contention that you deserve an
honorable discharge because it has almost been 40 years since you were
discharged. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the
seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, especially the UA’s that totaled
more than seven months. Finally, you are advised that there is no provision
in the law or regulation that allows for recharacterization due solely to
the passage of time. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was
proper as issued and no change is warranted.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
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.
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,
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07748-07
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 10 November 1967 after four years of prior honorable service. Shortly...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05868-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. 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 | CY2007 | 07629-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. About two months later, on 22 March 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a f our day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04031-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 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. On 5 November 1965 and 3 March 1967, you received two more NUJP’s for a four-day period of UA and another period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06684-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2001. 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. A year later, on 12 April 1968, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 62 days and breaking...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04158-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01873 12
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 27 January 1966, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 29 days. 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 | CY2001 | 04596-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. January 1968 you received NJP for a 14 day period of UA and were awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay. Given the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6783 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 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 | CY2006 | 03390-06
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 30 December 1965 at age 17. During the period from 12 January to...