Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11701-10
Original file (11701-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TUR
Docket No: 11701-10
16 September 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 13 September 2021. 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 29 July 1965 at age 17 and served for
about seven months without disciplinary incident. However, on 17
February and again on 16 June 1966, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA)
totalling 11 days and missing the movement of your ship. On 31
August and 9 September 1966 you were convicted by civil
authorities of leaving the scene of an accident, possession of a
stolen license plate, and shoplifting. Shortly thereafter, on 23
September 1966, you received your third NUP for two periods of UA
totalling 13 days and breaking restriction. The punishment
imposed was correctional custody for 30 days, reduction to
paygrade E-1, and a $54 forfeiture of pay.

On 31 October 1966 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to civil
conviction. After waiving your procedural rights, your
commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to civilian
conviction. On 1 December 1966 the discharge authority approved
this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to
discharge you under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct, and on 13 December 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. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repeated misconduct in both the military and civilian
communities. Finally, you were given an opportunity to defend
yourself but waived your procedural rights. 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,

lp Dente,

W. DEAN PFE
Executive D r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07446-05

    Original file (07446-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 7 September 1966 at age 17 and served for over a year without disciplinary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02720-09

    Original file (02720-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01557-00

    Original file (01557-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge was proper and no change is warranted. 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

    Original file (02157-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | 07599-07

    Original file (07599-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2008. 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 21 January 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an 85 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07201-08

    Original file (07201-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your prior period of honorable service, awards, and psychiatric evaluation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10343-02

    Original file (10343-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. 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 26 October 1966 you were convicted by SPCM of a 67 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, a $342...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03088-10

    Original file (03088-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. 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 | CY2012 | 01873 12

    Original file (01873 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 27 January 1966, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 29 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 | CY2009 | 11222-09

    Original file (11222-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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. On 13 January 1971 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...