DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 3013-10
26 January 2011
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 20 January 2011. 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.
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 9 February 1970 at age 17 and served
without disciplinary infraction until 3 March 1970, when you
began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not
terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 16
March 1970. On 15 April 1970 you were returned to military
custody. As a result, on 21 May 1970, you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of a 13 day period of UA.
On 21 January 1971 you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of a 193 day period of UA and failure to obey a lawful
order. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six
months and a $300 forfeiture of pay.
Subsequently, you were administratively processed for separation
by reason of unsuitability due to apathy. At that time you did
not object to the separation and waived your procedural rights.
Shortly thereafter, your commanding officer recommended discharge
under honorable conditions due to apathy as evidenced by your
nonpotential as a petty officer. The discharge authority
approved the recommendation and directed your commanding officer
to issue you a general discharge by reason of unsuitability. On
17 June 1971, after serving for three months and seven days on
active duty, you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, short peridd of active duty service, and desire to
have your length of service extended to include your periods of
time lost. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant relief because of your repeated
misconduct resulting from your repetitive and lengthy periods of
UA and confinement” Further, in accordance with regulatory
guidelines, your 390 days of lost time are not credited as time
served and therefore cannot be included to your length of
service. 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
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04329-10
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. Upon completion of the alternative service, former service members were granted a clemency discharge. 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 | 02157-10
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 30 January 1969, shortly after being released from confinement, you began another period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended on 8 April 1969, On 19 May 1969 you were again UA for a three day. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00051-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2003. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a recharacterization of your service because of your repetitive periods of UA, which resulted in a court-martial conviction, and since your conduct average -was insufficiently high to warrant a fully characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10982-10
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. As a result, on 27 January 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3862-13
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given the seriousness...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05736-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 November 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10989-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval’ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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 | CY2007 | 05925-07
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.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 30 April 1976 at age 17. You were so discharged on 6 December 1977.The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06564-10
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 | 09118-10
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 4 June 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge (OTH) for the good of service to avoid trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge...