Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05700-06
Original file (05700-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




 SMW
Docket No: 5700-06
7 May 2007





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 2 May 2007. 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.
On 31 October 1961 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. Enlistment documents show that you indicated that you had no prior arrests. However, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) report of 21 November 1961 showed that on 29 August 1961 you were charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. But it appears the charge was subsequently dismissed.
On 15 December 1961 your commanding officer (CO) initiated administrative separation by reason of fraudulent enlistment. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an undesirable discharge and elected to have your case heard by a discharge board. On 1 February 1962 the discharge board found that you had committed fraudulent enlistment by not disclosing your previous arrest and recommended a general discharge. On 8 February 1962 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed a general discharge by reason of fraudulent enlistment. On 14 February 1962 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire for a better discharge. The Board also considered your contention that the general discharge should have changed to honorable after 30 days. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your failure to disclose your arrest prior to enlistment. Regarding your contention, there is no provision in the law or regulations 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.
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.
The Board noted that you should contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification about your eligibility for benefits.
Sincerely,





















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05477-02

    Original file (05477-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    3 A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2003. In March 1962, during an investigation into the allegations of fraudulent enlistment, (CT) Camerino submitted a letter which stated that she was your wife because the two of you were married on 27 August 1956, and had children. At that time, you denied being married to (SS) Camerino.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03707-10

    Original file (03707-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2011. 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. Shortly thereafter, on 29 March 1976, you were the subject of an investigation regarding your pre-service drug usage and civil arrests.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04710-01

    Original file (04710-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    considered your application on 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. Thereafter, the commanding officer recommended discharge by reason of misconduct due to fraudulent enlistment. 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 | CY2007 | 02908-07

    Original file (02908-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2008. Subsequently, your commanding officer also recommended a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct as evidenced by five NJPs, pre-service misconduct, and psychiatric problems. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2404 14

    Original file (NR2404 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval: Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on - “ 10.April 2015... Finally, the Board concluded that the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) decision to recharacterize your service to “Honorable” for the --: sole purpose of receiving benefits does not negate your misconduct while: serving on active. for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on- the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2404 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR2404 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2015. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2731-13

    Original file (NR2731-13.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 uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of fraudulent enlistment. 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 | 02898-01

    Original file (02898-01.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. of officers convened on 20 January 1955 and recommended that you be separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of You declined to submit a Thereafter, you were notified that pre- The Board concluded that the A current FBI report obtained by the Board In its review of your application...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09405-08

    Original file (09405-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 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. Subsequently, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to issue you a general discharge by reason of unfitness due to the civil...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02717-11

    Original file (02717-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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. You requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).