DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490
BAN
Docket No: 02341-12
25 March 2013
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 20 March 2013. 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 1 February 1966, and
served without disciplinary incident until 25 August 1966, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a general order
violation. Shortly thereafter, you received the following NJUP’s:
on 9 September 1966, for sleeping on post; and on 7 October 1966
for assault with a deadly weapon. On 31 October 1966, you were
convicted at a special court-martial of breaking restriction,
unauthorized absence (UA), failing to make restricted men’s
muster, and using another service member’s liberty card. You
continued your misconduct with the following NUJP’s: on 16 May
1967 for failure to go to your appointed place of duty; on 25 May
1967, for failure to go to your appointed place of duty; on 13
September 1967, for assault; on 9 October 1968, for failure to go
to your appointed place of duty; on 14 January 1969, for a UA;
and on 21 January 1969 for breaking restriction and two
specifications of disobeying a lawful order. You were
recommended for separation with an undesirable discharge due to
misconduct. You waived your right to counsel and an
administrative discharge board (ADB). The separation authority
approved the recommendation, and on 7 February 1969, you were
separated with an undesirable discharge due to misconduct and an
RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
claim of health problems due to your service in Vietnam and poor
decision making. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant a change to your characterization
of service or separation code due to your frequent acts of
misconduct. Furthermore, the Board found you waived your right
to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention, or a better
characterization of service. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
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,
Vee st oy. Sa
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05868-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 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 thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03522-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2013. You were recommended for separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a pattern of 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 | CY2002 | 10197-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. imposed was reduction to On 11 March and again on 5 May 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling three days and breaking restriction. January 1961 the discharge authority then directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...
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 | CY2012 | 04144-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2013. As a result of the ONI investigation, on 25 September 1968, administrative discharge action was initiated and it was recommended that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to engaging in a homosexual act on 15 July 1968. In your case, the Board found an aggravating factor.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00714-07
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.On 8 July 1965, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 24...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00347-99
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months, forfeitures of $55 per month for four months and a bad conduct discharge. Thereafter, the commanding officer recommended an You were so discharged on An enlisted The Chief of Naval The board concluded The Board noted your contentions that you had an NJPs and convictions by four summary courts-martial and a In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08056 12
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. After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02044-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 August 2000. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. on 9 March 1969, you were On 15 December 1969 you received NJP for a two pay period punishment imposed was restriction for seven days and You were sentenced...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04904-06
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 Navy on 22 March 1966 at age 19. Although no disciplinary action was taken for...