DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TOR
Docket No: 11622-10
18 August 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 16 August 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 5 November 1959 at age 17 and served
for nearly a year without disciplinary incident. However, on 4
October 1960, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM)
of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and failure to
obey a lawful order. Shortly thereafter, on 31 December 1960,
you were apprehended by civil authorities and charged with
disorderly conduct.
On 2 January 1961, as a result of the aforementioned civil
arrest, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA). After
posting a $50 bond you were released from civil custody on 12
January 1961, thus terminating the period of UA. On 21 January
1961 you were convicted by civil authorities of the foregoing
charge of disorderly conduct. On 13 February 1961 you were
convicted by SCM of the 10 day period of UA and sentenced to
restriction for 30 days and a $30 forfeiture of pay. About four
months later, on 30 June 1961, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty.
On 29 November 1961, after undergoing a medical evaluation, you
were diagnosed with arthritis - direct trauma, left tarsil
navicular, and found to be unfit for duty. As a result, you were
transferred to the temporary disability retired list (TDRL). In
December 1961 you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of convenience of the government due to your diagnosed
arthritis. The discharge authority directed discharge under
honorable conditions by reason of convenience of the government
due to a physical disability as evidenced by your diagnosed
arthritis. On 18 December 1961 you were so discharged and placed
on the TDRL effective 19 December 1961. On 17 August 1965 you
were removed from the TDRL.
At the time of your separation character of service was based, in
part, on conduct and overall trait averages which were computed
from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct
average was 2.7. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at
the time of your separation for a fully honorable
characterization of service.
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. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive misconduct in both the military and civilian
communities, and since your conduct average was insufficiently
high to warrant a fully honorable characterization 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 | CY2008 | 07567-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2009. Furthermore, disciplinary action and an administrative separation are appropriate for alcohol related offenses. 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 | CY2008 | 05013-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2009. You enlisted in the Navy on 10 September 1957 at age 17 and immediately began a period of active duty. your conduct averag average of 3. separation for a fully h The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, i itigating factors, such as carefully weighed all potentially mi 10d of satisfactory service, desire to upgrade duct, and the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02411-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge given the six NJP’s, conviction by SCM and SPCM, two civil convictions, and your failure to attain the required average in conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3691 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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 concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your seven NUP’s,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02513-10
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. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SCM of misconduct, and civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
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 | 11259-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06342-01
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 November 1960 you received NJP for On 30 January 1961 you were convicted by convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty and were sentenced to restriction and extra duty for 10 days and a $40 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10669-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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. April 1961, you were convicted by a SCM of being UA for one day.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02238-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days, to On 3 August 1960 you received nonjudicial a $40 forfeiture of pay, and reduction on 6 May 1960, you were paygrade E-l. On 27 August and again on 8 October...