Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5909 13
Original file (NR5909 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

TAL
Docket No: 5909-13
17 June 2014

 

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 11 June 2014. 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 prebable material error or
injustice.

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

27 duly 1972 at the age of 18. You received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) on five occasions from 9 November 1973 through
17 October 1974 for three instances of unauthorized absence (UA)
for a period totaling 15 days, four instances of failure to obey
a lawful order, missing ship’s movement, disrespect to a
noncommissioned officer, breach of peace and failure to go to
your appointed place of duty. After your fourth NUP, you were
counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further
offenses could result in administrative separation. On

15 November 1974, you were convicted by summary court-martial
(SCM) of failure to go to your appointed place of duty, UA from
your unit for a period of four days and improper watch standing.
You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing
with an undesirable discharge (UD) due to unfitness. You
elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested
an administrative discharge board (ADB). You received NUP on
two additional occasions for failure to go to your appointed
place of duty, UA from your unit for a period of four days, two
instances assault, breach of peace, two instances of resisting
apprehension and damage to government property. On 15 January
1975, the ADB recommended a UD by reason of unfitness. The
separation authority agreed with the finding and recommendation
of the ADB and directed your UD due to unfitness, and on 13
February 1975, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness and repetitiveness of
your misconduct that resulted in seven NUJPs and one SCM. .
Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations
that allows for recharacterization of service due to the passage
of time or an individual's good behavior after discharge.
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,
TRS, FL

ROBERT D. ZALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8150 13

    Original file (NR8150 13.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 elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | 01889-09

    Original file (01889-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 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. 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 | 02619-09

    Original file (02619-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 July 1980, you received NUP for assault and breach of the peace. On 30 July 1980, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. 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 | CY2007 | 09388-07

    Original file (09388-07.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. Subsequently, 2 September 1975, an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11838-08

    Original file (11838-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 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. Subsequently, your case was forwarded, and on 1 June 1976 the separation authority approved the recommendation for an undesirable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03286-05

    Original file (03286-05.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, advisory opinion, 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 17 December 1973 at age 17 with parental...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09930-09

    Original file (09930-09.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 6 July 1973, you received NUP for being UA for a period of 15 days. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an other than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 07448-12

    Original file (07448-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2013. 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 10 May 1975, you were counseled regarding your frequent involvement with military authorities and warned that further misconduct could result in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3860-13

    Original file (NR3860-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval _ Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ; application on 19 March 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08294-08

    Original file (08294-08.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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 11 June 1976, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...