DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 9609-10
24 May 2011
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 May 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.
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 er injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and entered active duty on 29 October
1973. You received nonjudicial punishment on three occasions,
and were convicted by a summary court-martial and a special
court-martial. Your offenses included wrongful possession of
Marijuana (two specifications totaling over 13.4 grams), and
unauthorized absence (three specifications totaling over 31
days). You were notified that your commanding officer was
recommending you for administrative separation with a general
discharge due to misconduct. You waived all of your procedural
rights, including your right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 25 March 1977, you
received a general characterization of service due to
misconduct.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, alcohol
problems, and post service good conduct. However, the Board
concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your
unauthorized absences and drug abuse. The Board found that you
waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a better characterization of service. The Board
noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge,
since individuals who are separated for misconduct normally
receive an other than honorable characterization of service.
You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due to your
merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. In
view of the above, 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,
Wem, “Fen Nee
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Deputy Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05558-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2011. You also had another period of UA totaling five days for which no disciplinary action was taken. 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 | 12373-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 August 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 10208-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 06290-10
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. The separation 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 injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05700-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. On 6 April 1973, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two instances of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period totaling 141 days. 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 | 06418-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 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 | 06287-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07097-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 March 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 05837-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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 | CY2011 | 00754-11
An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exiatence 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 error or injustice.