PEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC
Docket No: 09157-1210
24 August 2013
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 24 August 2011. 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. The Board also considered the advisory opinion
from the Office of the Judge Advocate General (OJAG), dated i7
August 2011, a copy of which is enclosed.
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
15 September 1976, at age 18. On 8 November 1976, the commanding
officer at recruit training command approved a waiver for you to
remain on active duty based on the results of a preliminary
background investigation which disclosed your pre-service
civilian arrests and drug use. You failed to disclose these
incidents on your in-processing paperwork. On 21 April 1977, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for being absent from your
appointed place of duty. On 6 May 1977, you received NJP for
disobeying a superior commissioned officer, and breach of the
peace. On 6 August 1977, you received NJP for failure to obey a
general order, and assault. On 22 October 1977, you received NIP
for disobeying a lawful order. On 3 November 1977, you were
arrested by the Brazilian authorities for public drunkenness,
resisting arrest, and assaulting a police officer, and were
banned from entry into the country. On 23 November 1977, you
received NUP for being absent from your appointed place of duty,
being disrespectful toward a petty officer, being incapacitated
for the performance of duty, and wrongful possession of
marijuana. On 3 February 1978, the discharge authority informed
your command that any additional misconduct would result in an
administrative discharge. Your misconduct continued and on 13
February 1978, you were arrested by the Charleston, South
Carolina, police for shoplifting. On 23 June 1978, you received
your sixth NUP for two occasions of failure to go to your
appointed place of duty, and violating a lawful general order.
On 25 July 1978, you were released from active duty with a void
enlistment.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record
of service, and the advisory opinion. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your characterization of service based on your fraudulent
entry, and serious misconduct. The Board noted that you were
Fortunate to have received a void enlistment, as you could have
been processed for misconduct and have received an other than
honorable 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,
W. DEAN DPE
e
Executive D
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00453-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 2010. 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 | 00670-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07560-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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 | CY2010 | 03541-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10839-09
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. 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 10 April 1981, you received an other than honorable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019821
He was discharged for fraudulent entry instead. On 15 July 1977, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant that discharge proceedings were initiated against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, by reason of fraudulent enlistment. Chapter 14 established policy and prescribed procedures for processing fraudulent entry cases and provided for the administrative disposition of enlisted personnel for misconduct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03331-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 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. Your offenses were two specifications of disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, two periods of UA totalling two days, assault, and two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02884-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. duty for 14 days. However, this request was denied and on 9 May 1979, after the BCD was approved at all levels of review, you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05234-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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 | CY2011 | 00939-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken by civil authorities for this misconduct.