Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02640-06
Original file (02640-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


 TJR
 Docket No: 2640-06
13 October 2006








This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 3 October 2006. 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 ifljustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 9 June 1972 at age 18. During the period from 26 October to 8 November 1972 you received NJP on three occasions for four periods of absence from your appointed place of duty.
After undergoing a medical evaluation you were diagnosed with central scotoma of the right eye. On 16 April 1973 a physical evaluation board determined that your disability may have been permanent, and as a result, recommended an administrative separation. On 11 May 1973 you were notified of the foregoing recommendation. On 18 May 1973 the medical board concurred with the recommendation for separation. On 31 May 1973 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and directed separation with the characterization of service warranted by your service record. On 14 June 1973 you were issued a general discharge by reason of unsuitability due to a physical disability.


Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 2.9. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and assertion that you were injured while serving in Vietnam. It further considered your assertion that you did not receive a certificate of service for your honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive misconduct which resulted in three NJP5, and since your conduct average was insufficiently high to warrant an honorable discharge. Finally, there is no evidence in the record and you submitted none, to support your assertion that you were injured in Vietnam. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,


                                                                        W. DEAN PFEIFFER
                                                                        Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07609-10

    Original file (07609-10.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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such the Board noted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00043-06

    Original file (00043-06.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 Marine Corps on 13 October 1969 at age 18. Subsequently, you were issued a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12563 11

    Original file (12563 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. However, during the period from 11 July to 6 September 1973, you received three more NUPs for a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA),...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8403 13

    Original file (NR8403 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant vecharacterization of your husband’s discharge because of his repeated and lengthy periods of UA which resulted in three SPCMs, and since his conduct average was insufficiently hign to warrant a fully honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09546-09

    Original file (09546-09.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. Further, Sailors with a record of misconduct normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such, the Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Feb 14 13_34_15 CST 2001

    Original file (Document scanned on Wed Feb 14 13_34_15 CST 2001.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL. He noted that He The Board specifically noted In its review of your application the Board conducted a thorough review of both service and medical records, and the post-service medical records you provided. The Board also could not ignore the multiple notations With regard to your psychiatrist’s opinion that you suffered from PTSD, a paranoid personality disorder and a possible organic brain syndrome, the Board noted that like the other...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Wed Feb 14 14_01_05 CST 2001

    Original file (Document scanned on Wed Feb 14 14_01_05 CST 2001.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL. He noted that He The Board specifically noted In its review of your application the Board conducted a thorough review of both service and medical records, and the post-service medical records you provided. The Board also could not ignore the multiple notations With regard to your psychiatrist’s opinion that you suffered from PTSD, a paranoid personality disorder and a possible organic brain syndrome, the Board noted that like the other...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07663-03

    Original file (07663-03.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 iniusti cc. On 24 June 1972 the discharge authority directed a general discharge by reason of unsuitability due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02845-06

    Original file (02845-06.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 22 August 1968 at age 19. Finally, under current standards, a Sailor...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08339-08

    Original file (08339-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. 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...