DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DCG 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 867-11
21 October 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 18 October 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 ail
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 2 November 1972 at age 18 and served
for about a year without disciplinary incident. However, on 14
November and again on 28 December 1973, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NIP) for two specifications of disobedience. About
four months later, on 15 April 1975, you received your third NUP
for wrongful possession of marijuana and were awarded a $390
forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, and correctional
custody for 30 days.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of convenience of the government due to substandard
performance. after waiving your procedural rights, the discharge
authority directed discharge under honorable conditions, and on
15 May 1975, you were issued a general discharge.
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 the characterization of your
general discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
general discharge because of your misconduct, which resulted in
NIP, and included drug abuse. Finally, the Board noted that you
were fortunate to receive a general discharge since Sailors
discharged with a record of misconduct, such as yours, normally
receive discharges under other than honorable conditions.
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,
\piug
W. DEAN PFELKF
Fxecutive Di r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01537-11
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 9 August 1973 you were ‘convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 27 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $408 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge {BCD}. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03870-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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, reguiations, 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 | 05693-10
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 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 After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13262-10
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. As a result, on 10 February 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08039-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. Consequé1itly, 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 | 11031-10
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. As a result, on 31 December 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the two foregoing periods of UA totalling 102 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01922-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05054-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. On 28 December 1976 the separation authority directed that you be separated for misconduct with a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10229-10
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. 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 25 February 1975 after nearly two years and eight months of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06575-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. ‘However, your request was disapproved on 12 October 1973, and on 19 November 1973, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 46 day period of UA, disrespect, and two instances of...