Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04037-09
Original file (04037-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .

 

TIR
Docket No: 4037-09
26 August 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 25 August 2009. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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.

Béter 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 Marine Corps on 10 April 1967 at age 17 and
served without disciplinary incident until 10 January 1968, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for absence from your
‘appointed place of duty and were awarded extra duty for 14 days.

During the period from 29 September to 9 December 1969 you
received NUP on three more occasions for a two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totalling four days, wearing your
uniform in a manner not prescribed by regulations, failure to
obey a lawful order, and breaking restriction.

You also received NJP on three more occasions during the period

from 13 to 26 January 1970 for two specifications of failure to

obey a lawful order, recklessly operating a tractor trailer, and
breaking restriction.
On 3 March 1970 you were notified of pending administrative
discharge action by reason of unfitness as evidenced by frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel
and to present your case to an administrative discharge board
(ADB). Your commanding officer recommended an undesirable
discharge by reason of unfitness. On 2 April 1970 the discharge
authority approved this recommendation and directed your
commanding officer to issue you an undesirable discharge by
reason of unfitness, and on 10 April 1970, you were so
discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, combat history, desire to have your discharge
upgraded, and the passage of time. It also considered your
assertion of suffering from a post traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD) and the mental health progress notes provided in support
thereto; which also includes drug and alcohol abuse. The Board
further considered your previous applications with this Board in
March 2000 and the Naval Discharge Review Board in December 1984.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge |
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, which
resulted in seven NJPs. The Board noted that in December 1987,
you reported having PTSD as a result of your 1983 civil
conviction for transporting illegal drugs. Furthermore, there is
no evidence in the record, and you submitted none to support a
diagnoses of PTSD. Finally, the Board noted that you were given
an opportunity to possibly receive a better characterization of
service but waived your procedural right to present your case to
an ADB. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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
xecord, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

Wud

W. DEAN PHEI
Executive tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01596-09

    Original file (01596-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. 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 | CY2011 | 12499 11

    Original file (12499 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 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 | CY2010 | 10254-10

    Original file (10254-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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 | CY2008 | 06957-08

    Original file (06957-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. Subsequently, your commanding officer forwarded your case concurring with the ADB’s findings but recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08649-06

    Original file (08649-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 July 2007. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 25 January 1962, upon release from Civil authorities, you were returned to military control thus terminating a 39 day period of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01752-09

    Original file (01752-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 1 January 1971, an ADB recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to drug abuse as evidenced by your wrongful possession and use of dangerous drugs, narcotics, and marijuana. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12268-08

    Original file (12268-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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. Therefore, you were recommended for administrative separation with an undesirable discharge (UD) due to being unfit for military service, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01863-09

    Original file (01863-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2009. Therefore, you were recommended for administrative separation with an undesirable discharge (UD) due to being unfit for military service, and you exercised your right to request an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05485-06

    Original file (05485-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 18 March 1968. After review by the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02231-00

    Original file (02231-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 September 2000. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Given all the...