Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06887-06
Original file (06887-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR

Docket No: 6887-06
22 March 2007

 

 

a * .
eon = en ee he
Par oe ae

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 20 March 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.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 October 1972 at age 19 and
served for about three months without disciplinary incident.
However, during the period from 9 January to 17 March 1973 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on three occasions for two
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order, absence from
your appointed place of duty, and misbehavior as a sentinel.

During the period from 27 July to 1 October 1974 you received NJP
on three more occasions for failure to obey a lawful order
possession of marijuana, and breaking restriction. During this
period you were also convicted by civil authorities of possession
of narcotics. On 20 December 1974 you were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of assault and sentenced to a $100 forfeiture
of pay. Shortly thereafter, on 30 December 1974, you received
your seventh NUP for a one day period of unauthorized absence
(UA). The punishment imposed was a $80 forfeiture of pay and
extra duty for 14 days.
On 10 January 1975 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of unfitness due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel
and to present your case to an administrative discharge board.
Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended an undesirable
discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. On 7 February
1975 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and
directed an undesirable discharge, and on 18 February 1975 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 assertion that your discharge was a result of
being tricked by one of your superiors. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive misconduct, which resulted in seven NUPs anda
court-martial conviction. Finally, there is no evidence in the
record, and you submitted none, to support your assertion.
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, ae

Spe Se

Executive Dinac

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11117-07

    Original file (11117-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02231-00

    Original file (02231-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 September 2000. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Given all the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09388-07

    Original file (09388-07.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. Subsequently, 2 September 1975, an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03451-10

    Original file (03451-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. 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 | 01172-07

    Original file (01172-07.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 23 May 1972 at age 18. On 19 September 1973 you were again...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03189-11

    Original file (03189-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 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. 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 | CY2011 | 04042-11

    Original file (04042-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 January 1977 you received NUP for absence from your appointed place of duty and two specifications of failure to obey a lawful order. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of the narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your repeated and frequent misconduct which resulted in nine NUJPs, counselling on several occasions for involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04904-06

    Original file (04904-06.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 March 1966 at age 19. Although no disciplinary action was taken for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13341-10

    Original file (13341-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 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. 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 | CY2007 | 03780-07

    Original file (03780-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...