DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 3750-09
12 February 2010.
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 3 February 2010. 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 and began a period of active duty on 28
May 1965 at the age of 18. On 8 September 1965, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an unauthorized absénce (UA) from
your appointed place of duty. On 23 November 1965, you were
convicted at special court-martial (SPCM) for a 15 day period of
UA from your unit. On 14 March 1966, you received NJP for
unauthorized possession of another man’s liberty pass. On 23
March 1966, you received NUP for falsely altering a military
identification card. On 10 May 1966, you were convicted at
summary court-martial (SCM) for an eight day period of UA from.
your unit. On 16.May 1966, you received NUP for UA from your
appointed place of duty. On 17 May 1966, you were counseled and
warned that further misconduct could resuit in administrative
discharge action. On 30 June 1966, you received NUP for UA from
you appointed place of duty and not wearing the proper uniform.
On 5 July 1966, administrative discharge action was initiated to
separate you by reason of unfitness. You waived your rights to
consult counsel or submit a statement. On 7 July 1966, your >
commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for
unfitness. On 21 July 1966, the discharge authority directed an
OTH discharge by reason of unfitness. On 3 August 1966 you were
so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in five NJP’s, one SCM and one SPCM, Additionally,
after your forth NIP you were counseled and warned concerning the
consequences of further misconduct. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00456 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. On 28 September 1965, you received NJP for being UA for seven days. In this regard, the Board noted that you admitted to participating in homosexual acts under aggravating circumstances by receiving compensation.
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 | CY2010 | 03926-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 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. You requested suspension of the BCD and restoration to earn an honorable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03027-09
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 found that these factors were not sufficient to.warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NUP’s and conviction by two SCM’s and one SPCM for serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05791-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 11921-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 2011. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR4077-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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. 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 | CY2009 | 03355-09
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 8 September 1986, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05781-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 May 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 | CY2009 | 00740-09
Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your |... application on 28 October 2009. On 13 October 1964, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to unfitness. by the Board... .