DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 26370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 11002-10
20 July 2011
Thig 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 19 July 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 11 March 1965 at age 17. You served
without disciplinary incident until 22 October 1965, when you
were convicted by summary court~martial (SCM) of a 17: day period
of unauthorized absence (UA) and sleeping on watch. You were —
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 25 days, a $50
forfeiture of pay, and reduction to paygrade E-i. .
On 22 June and again on 12 September 1966 you were convicted by
SCM of two periods of UA totalling three days, failure to obey a
lawful order, two periods of absence from your appointed place of
duty, and breaking restriction. You also received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) on 18 August 1966 for failure to go to your
appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. You submitted a
written request for discharge in which you noted, in part, that
you were too immature to be retained and that you would get into
more trouble because you did not like the regulations of the
Navy. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal
counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge
board, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer
to issue you an undesirable discharge, and on 18 October 1966,
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 and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
‘Considered your letter of explanation regarding your period of
service and the passage of time. 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 an NJP and three
court-martial convictions. Further, you were given an
opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural rights
and requested discharge from the Navy. Finally, no discharge is
upgraded due solely to the passage of time. 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,
Executive rv Oo
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 11000-10
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 1 April 1968 you received your third NUP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty. 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 | CY2006 | 11044-06
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 Marine Corps on 18 Nay 1960 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at hard...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07446-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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 | CY2002 | 00950-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. 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. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07927-07
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 Marine Corps on 3 April 1961 at age 17. On 10 February 1965 an ADB recommended an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6783 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 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...