DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL R E C O R D S
2 NAVY ANNEX
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TRG
Docket No: 1469-03
29 July 2003
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 29 July 2003. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 26 April 1974 at age 18. On 14 March
1975 you were disenrolled from the nuclear power training program
because of academic failure. Subsequently, you were an
unauthorized absentee from 19 April to 15 July 1975. On 19 July
1975 you deserted from the Navy and remained in that status until
you were apprehended on 12 June 1986, a period of almost 11
years.
A general court-martial convened on 16 July 1986 and convicted
you of the foregoing period of desertion. The court sentenced
you to reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and
allowances, confinement at hard labor for 90 days and a bad
conduct discharge (BCD) . On 4 May 1987, upon completion of
appellate review, you received the BCD.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and contention
that you have been a good citizen for many years and have been
adequately punished for your youthful mistakes. However, the
Board found that these factors and contentions were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your conviction by a general court-martial of a very lengthy
period of desertion. The Board concluded that the discharge was
proper as issued and no change is warranted.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10272-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. 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 | CY2002 | 09384-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. You received NJP on 22 February 1992 for a 17 period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 4 5 days and a $550 forfeiture of pay. However, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06278-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2003. The letter of 27 March 1986 that notified you that the request was denied stated that your "statements clearly demonstrate that your request for discharge (was) based on dissatisfaction with the naval service and not by reason of conscientious objector beliefs." Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09534-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00327-01
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. However, during the seven month period from March 1973 to October 1973 you received four nonjudicial punishments ( N J P ) and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06136-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2003. A minimum average conduct mark of 3.0 was required for a fully honorable characterization of service at the time of separation. 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 | CY2001 | 07488-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2002. Your record reflects that on 21 August 1982 you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 9 April 1985. 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 | CY2003 | 01323-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. However, on 3 October 1985 you were dropped from this counseling due to your non-amenability to treatment. 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 | 06030-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2003. 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 | CY2002 | 10329-02
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 11 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...