DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
JRE
Docket No. 09835-08
3 November 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 30 October 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.
The Board you served on active duty in the Navy from 15 June
1972 to 24 May 1974, when you were discharged under honorable
conditions by reason of unfitness/frequent incidents of a
discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. The
discharge was based on your extensive disciplinary record, which
included four nonjudicial punishments, four convictions by civil
authorities, and a conviction by summary court-martial. There
is no indication in the available records that you were unfit
for duty by reason of physical disability at that time. You
would not have been entitled to disability separation or
retirement even if you had been disabled, because disciplinary
processing would have been precluded by your administrative
discharge. 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,
lyQuS |
W. DEAN
Executive Di r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01651-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2008. The Board noted that while the Laird Memorandum provided that administrative discharges under other than honorable conditions issued solely on the basis of personal use of drugs or possession of drugs for the purpose of such use would be reviewed for recharacterization, it did not require the recharacterization of each discharge reviewed under that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08444.07
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. However, after two failures to appear in court, you were convicted of DUI on 14 June 1972. On 20 June 1972, you received NUP for 27 days of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08444-07
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. However, after two failures to appear in court, you were convicted of DUI on 14 June 1972. On 20 June 1972, you received NUP for 27 days of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03931-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were separated from the Navy with a bad conduct discharge on 4 Februray 1982, upon completion of the appellate review of your conviction and sentence. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07599-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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. On 21 January 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an 85 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07113-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10464-07
You sncurred 444 days time lost as a result of nine periods of unauthorized absence (UA), period of confinement, and your incarceration by civil authorities. You were discharged by reason of misconduct/civil conviction on 28 January 1977, with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 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 | CY2009 | 09027-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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 | 07470-07
07470-07 1 July 2008 , your naval record and applicable statutes January 1968, separation. The Board concluded that the NDRB acted properly on 20 April 1978 when it declined to affirm the upgrade of your discharge under uniform standards for discharge review, given your request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial for possession and use of marijuana, and your extensive prior disciplinary record, which included four instances of nonjudicial punishment, and convictions by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05707-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2008. The mititary => departments may assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. 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.