DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JDR
Docket No: 7097-14
5 August 2015
This i8 in referefice to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552.
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute
of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
23 June 2015. 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, began a period of active duty on
13 October 1966, and served without disciplinary incident for
about one year and 10 months. However, on 4 September 1968 and
25 October 1968, you received a civil conviction and nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for being drunk and disorderly, assault,
resisting arrest, being drunk in public while in uniform,
improper wear of your uniform, and being disrespectful in
language. On 30 April 1969, you were convicted at a summary
court-martial (SCM) of assault and battery, provoking speech,
and being drunk and disorderly. You received a second drunk and
disorderly civil conviction on 26 May 1969. During the period
from 27 May 1969 to 19 May 1970, you received four more NJPs for
unauthorized absence, being disrespectful in language and
gesture, and wearing improper insignia. On 24 June 1969, you
were counseled and advised that due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities, you were being
considered for processing from the naval service by reason of
unfitness. However, on 27 July 1970, you were released from
active duty under honorable conditions. On 19 June 1972, upon
completion of your military obligation, you received a general
discharge.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service, to include your post-service
accomplishments, desire to upgrade your discharge, and your
assertion that the Navy discharged you without treating you for
alcohol dependency. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct which
resulted in two civil convictions, five NJPs and a SCM
conviction. Further, with regard to your assertion, alcohol
abuse does not excuse your misconduct or failure to adhere to
Navy regulations. In this regard, the Board noted that you were
fortunate to receive a general discharge. Finally, the Board
believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when you
were allowed to complete your military obligation since a
discharge under other than honorable conditions is often
directed when an individual has repeated misconduct.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
Tt 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 within one year from the date of the Board's
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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,
R
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00923 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08319-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08319-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08741-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. As a result, on 28 February 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...
USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600993
ex-, USMC MD06-00993Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request: Application Received: 20060718Characterization of Service: Narrative Reason for Separation: misconduct-pattern of misconduct (ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE BOARD REQUIRED BUT WAIVED)Discharge Authority: MARCORSEPMAN 6210.3Last Duty Assignment/Command at Discharge: HQSVCBN FMFPAC CAMp SMitH HIApplicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Review Requested: Representation: Decision: Date of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02667-06
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 17 July 1950 at age 20. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4269 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2015. 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, you were notified of pending administrative separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement at which time you waived...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5291 13
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04085-11
| A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your > application on 25 January 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in a civil conviction, an NJP and two SCMs. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...