DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No: 11317-07
25 June 2008
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 10 June 2008. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 23 August 1966 at age 18. On
3 September 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for
disobedience and disrespect. On 26 July 1967 you arrived in
Vietnam. On 10 September 1968 you received NIP for three
instances of disobedience while at an ambush site and
communicating a threat. The service record entry indicates that
you did not appeal the NJP. On 7 November 1968 you were
convicted by a special court-martial of disobedience and wrongful
use of provoking words. You left Vietnam on 12 March 1969. On
25 February 1970 you were released from active duty with your
service characterized as honorable. Subsequently, you were
issued an honorable discharge certificate at the end of your
military obligation.
You contend in your application, in effect, that the nature of
your offenses recorded in your service record for which you
received NJP on 10 September 1968 was misstated. It was assumed
that you wanted the NJP removed from your record.
Please be advised that the evidence to support an NUP is
routinely destroyed after several years. Therefore, given the
passage of time the only record of the 11 September 1968 NUP is
the entry in your service record.
The Board concluded that in the absence of evidence to the
contrary it must conclude that the offenses you committed were
properly stated and there is no basis for removal of the NJP from
your record.
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,
Lo ones |
W. DEAN E F
Executive D ctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09341-07
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 30 October 1965, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18. On 30 October 1969, you were released...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03697-08
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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 25 March 1976, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00714-07
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 8 July 1965, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 24...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05278-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 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. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00989-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 2009. You received confinement and a forfeiture of pay. 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 | CY2007 | 07934-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, the naval record you submitted 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps for four years on 31 July 1959 at age 20. You were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12070-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2011. 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08827-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 2010. 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 | 06094-07
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. In connection with this processing you acknowledged that separation could result in an other than honorable (OTH) discharge and elected the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09825-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary record...