Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05754-05
Original file (05754-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NA AL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370 5100


                                                                                                    CRS
                                                                                                   Docket No: 5754-05
                                                                                                   30 November 2006







This is in reference to your application n for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provision 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 15 November 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable o 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.

The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 27 November 1957 after more than two years of prior active service. The record reflects that you received four nonjudicial punishments and were convicted by two summary courts-martial. The offenses included unauthorized absences totalin three days, drunk and disorderly conduct, two uniform violations , being uncooperative with the shore patrol, drunkenness, failure to obey a lawful order, and disorderly conduct.
Subsequently, on 15 July 1960 you were convicted by civil authorities of disorderly conduct, drunkenness, indecent exposure, and resisting arrest. The court sentenced you to confinement for 90 days. On 23 September 1960 your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due t the civil conviction. When informed of the recommendation, y u elected to waive the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board. After review by the discharge authority y, the recommendation for separation was modified and on 20 October 1960 you received an
undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement with military and civilian authorities.
In its review of your application the board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such a your youth and the contention that an unspecified illness caused your misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of frequent involvement with military and civilian authorities. In this regard, you were the subject of six disciplinary actions and a civil conviction in a period of less than three years. Further, there is n evidence in the record, and you have submitted none, to show t at you suffered from an illness at the time o your service, yen if you did, and it became symptomatic during your period f active duty, there is no indication that the illness caused an inability to know right from wrong or adhere o the right, or hat it was sufficiently mitigating to warrant recharacterizati n. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The name 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 11 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 o injustice.
























2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06450-06

    Original file (06450-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 27 December 1956 at age 17 with parental consent. On 23 December 1959 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03695-03

    Original file (03695-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2003. On 30 June 1959 an administrative discharge board (ADB) recommended that you be retained in the Marine Corps. When you were informed that administrative separation action had been initiated due to the civil conviction, you again elected to retain all of your procedural rights.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10329-02

    Original file (10329-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 11 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00780-03

    Original file (00780-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs, a SCM conviction for a lengthy period of unauthorized absence, and the civil conviction for drug possession. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02068-99

    Original file (02068-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. 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 | CY2008 | 02008-08

    Original file (02008-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. On 13 April 1962 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty and sentenced to hard labor for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06969-00

    Original file (06969-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. 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 | 02667-06

    Original file (02667-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 17 July 1950 at age 20. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 03990-98

    Original file (03990-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 1999. 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 | CY2001 | 07708-01

    Original file (07708-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2002. 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. Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge, narrative reason for separation, and reenlistment code were proper and...