Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11928-10
Original file (11928-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TAL
Docket No: 11928-10
10 August 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 3 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.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient

to establish the existence of probable materiai error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

27 August 1969 at age 17. You received nonjudicial punishment
(NTP) on three occasions for assault, two instances of
unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a periods totaling
23 days, dereliction in the performance of duty, failure to obey
a written order and being disrespectful in language toward a
petty officer. On 21 October 1971, you were arrested by civil
authorities in Silver City, New Mexico, for reckless driving and
driving while intoxicated. You were sentenced to 27 days in
Grant County jail. You were counseled regarding your misconduct
and warned that further offenses could result in administrative
separation. On 12 December 1972, you were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of two instances of UA from your unit for a
period totaling 39 days. On 6 January 1973, you Signed a
Statement that you voluntarily accepted a general discharge for
the convenience of the government. On 23 January 1973, you
received an early separation under honorable conditions and were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, Vietnam
service, and overall record. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge or a change in your reenlistment code, given
the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in three NUPs, a
SCM, and periods of UA that totaled over two months. The Board
also believed that you were fortunate to receive a general
discharge since a discharge under other than honorable conditions
is often directed when a Sailor has committed misconduct such as
yours. Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy
regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due
solely to the passage of time. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel

will be furnished upon request.

The Board also noted that you should contact the Department of
the Navy, Navy Personnel Command (BUPERS), Code PERS-3C, 5720
Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055-3120 to request that you be
issued the Presidential Unit Citation and administrative
corrections be made to your Certificate of Discharge or Release
from Active Duty (DD Form 214).

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,

\ nas
W. DEAN P R
Executive radior

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11921-10

    Original file (11921-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 05700-10

    Original file (05700-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 03773-10

    Original file (03773-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. On 9 November 1990 you were so discharged. 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 | CY2013 | NR3616 13

    Original file (NR3616 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2013. On 7 July 1971, you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of two 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 | CY2008 | 07244-08

    Original file (07244-08.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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could result in an undesirable discharge (UD) and waived the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11980-10

    Original file (11980-10.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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). 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 | 07395-10

    Original file (07395-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. Documentary material considered by together with all the Board consisted of your application, 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 | 06418-10

    Original file (06418-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2013 | NR4315 13

    Original file (NR4315 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 20 February 1973, you made a written request for discharge for the good of service to avoid trial by court-martial for failure to go to your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05028-10

    Original file (05028-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.