Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11235-06
Original file (11235-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5 100
TJR
                                                                                          Docket No: 11235-06
                                                                                          31 October 2007

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 30 October 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 Navy on 10 August 1964 at age 17. You served without disciplinary incident until 12 January 1966, when you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of forgery and sentenced to a $60 forfeiture of pay. About three months later, on 28 April 1966, you were apprehended by civil authorities. As a result, on 3 June 1966, you were convicted by civil authorities of the traffic offense of hit and run. You were sentenced to a $225 fine and confinement for 20 days. On 20 July 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJ?) for missing the movement of your ship and an 18 day period of unauthorized absence (nA) and were awarded correctional custody for 25 days. On 29 November and again on 16 December 1966 you received NJP for a three day period of UA and absence from your appointed place of duty. About seven months later, on 25 July 1967, you received your fourth NJP for failure to obey a lawful order.
On 20 August 1968 you were released from active duty under honorable conditions and transferred to the Naval Reserve. On 28 August 1970, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were issued a general discharge.




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 2.83. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your discharge 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 of abuse of authority by your superiors. It also considered your assertion that you believed that you would have received an honorable discharge because you fulfilled your military obligation. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your serious and repetitive misconduct in both the military and civilian communities, and since your conduct average was insufficiently high to warrant an honorable discharge. Further, the Board concluded that with a record of four NJPs, a court-martial conviction, and conviction by civil authorities, you were fortunate to have received a general discharge. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, to support your assertions. 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 PFIEFFER                                                                                                             Executive Di rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11044-06

    Original file (11044-06.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 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08600-06

    Original file (08600-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2007. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, on 17 November 1969 you received your sixth NUP for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days. The record further reflects that on 1...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08034-08

    Original file (08034-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. About six months later, on 30 December 1966 you received NUP for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and disorderly conduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08848-08

    Original file (08848-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. 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 | 04308-06

    Original file (04308-06.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 4 December 1953 at age 18. About six months later, on 23 June...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05719-06

    Original file (05719-06.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 October 1966 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident until...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06398-06

    Original file (06398-06.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 8 May 1972 at age 17. The Board further considered your assertion that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01650-07

    Original file (01650-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late brother’s 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 brother enlisted in the Marine Corps on 10 February 1975 at age 17 and served for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 08055-03

    Original file (08055-03.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 injustice. Your conduct average was 3.2. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00116-07

    Original file (00116-07.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 28 February 1959 at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded...