DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 9266-08
8 July 2009
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 7 July 2009. 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 and medical records,
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. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 8 February 1967. You received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) on eight occasions for three instances of
unauthorized absence totaling more than six days, drunk and
disorderly on two occasions, assault of two shore patrolmen,
resisting apprehension, use of reproachful language on two
occasions, drunk in uniform, failure to obey a lawful order,
and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On
14 May 1969, you were counseled and warned that you were being
recommended for administrative separation for frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities
with a type warranted by service record characterization. On
13 August 1969, you received a general discharge for frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities, and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Characterization of service is based in part on marks assigned
-on a periodic basis. For a fully honorable characterization of
service at the time of your separation, you needed a 3.0
average in military behavior. Your average was 2.9.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth, belief
that your discharge would automatically be upgraded after six
months, and alcohol abuse problem. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
changing your general discharge because of your. numerous acts
of misconduct and insufficient military behavior mark average.
You are advised that no discharge is upgraded based merely on
the passage of time. The Board noted that you were fortunate
to receive a general discharge, because an other than honorable
discharge would have been appropriate in light of your numerous
acts of misconduct. In view of the above, 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,
Copy to:
The Honorable PY
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10065-08
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. On 23 August 1984, you were notified of pending administrative separation action for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a pattern of misconduct (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities), and an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07235-08
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. Given your repetitive misconduct and failure to attain the behavior mark average required for a fully honorable characterization of service, the Board found that your service warranted a general characterization of service, and further noted that you were fortunate to have received such a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07929-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 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 | CY2008 | 08848-08
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 | 05719-06
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 | CY2008 | 07443-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. Nonetheless, you waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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 | CY2010 | 05566-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2011. You also had two additional periods of UA totaling 37 days for which no disciplinary action was taken. 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 | CY2011 | 03262-11
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 | CY2003 | 08055-03
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 | CY2008 | 07567-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2009. Furthermore, disciplinary action and an administrative separation are appropriate for alcohol related offenses. 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.