DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN
Docket No: 01398-0909
22 December 2009
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 15 December 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, his 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 and began a period of active duty on
30 December 1964 at age 17. During the period from 14 April 1965
to.25 May 1967 you received four nonjudicial punishments (NUP’s)
for assault, two periods of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to
go to your appointed place of duty, and disobedience. On 30 June
1967, you were convicted by summary court~martial (SCM) of
breaking restriction, having an unauthorized liberty pass and
Pistol custody card, and three instances of disobedience. on
18 July 1967 and 23 October 1968, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 289 days, and
breaking restriction. As a result of your last SPCM, you were
sentenced to confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, and
a bad conduct discharge (BCD). However, the convening authority
suspended your BCD for a period of 12 months. On 13 January
1969, you began another period of UA that lasted until
24 Pebruary 1969, when you were apprehended by civil authorities
for possession of marijuana. On 13 March 1969, you were returned
to military authorities, the probationary period was terminated,
and you received an other than honorable discharge on 4 June
1969.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and Vietnam service. Nevertheless, the Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your four NUP’s,
conviction by SCM, and especially the two SPCM convictions, one
of which was for a lengthy period of UA totaling over nine
months. 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 PF
Executive D or
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 | 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 | CY2012 | 00575-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06991-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. 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 | 08600-06
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 | CY2013 | NR3691 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your seven NUP’s,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR466 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband'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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 | CY2014 | NR5108 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2015. 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 22 May 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 79 day period of UA and sentenced to a $97 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, confinement...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08107-08
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. 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...