Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01585-06
Original file (01585-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 TRG
 Docket No:1585-06
 17 May 2007



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 15 May 2007. 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 27 February 1985 at age 20. you completed initial training and on 11 September 1985. you reported to your first duty station. On 6 December 1985 and 26 March 1986, you received nonjudicial punishment for short periods of unauthorized absence.
A special court-martial convened on 16 December 1986 and convicted you of three periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 194 days. The court sentenced you to forfeiture of $400 pay per month for two months, confinement at hard labor for two months, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge. Subsequently, you began appellate leave and remained in that status until the bad conduct discharge was issued on 30 January
1988.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and contention that your recruiter advised you not to mention that you suffered from bipolar disorder. You are implying that this disorder contributed to your disciplinary problems while in the Navy. You also claim that you were unaware that your discharge was not automatically upgraded after a period of time. There is no documentation in your record, and you have submitted none, to support your contention that you suffered from bipolar disorder while in the Navy. However, it is clear that the court-martial believed that you were responsible for your actions and competent to stand trial, or you would not have been convicted. Finally, there is no provision in the law or regulations that would require a discharge to be automatically upgraded based solely on the passage of a period of time. 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,




                                                               W. DEAN PFEIFFER
                   Executive Director



























2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01190-08

    Original file (01190-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01225-09

    Original file (01225-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2009. after review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and you were discharged on 22 May 1986 with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 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 | CY2006 | 08579-06

    Original file (08579-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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. 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 | CY2001 | 04713-01

    Original file (04713-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Your allegations of error and application on 20 November 2001. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08210-07

    Original file (08210-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2008. You were separated from the Navy with a bad conduct discharge on 31 January 1997. 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 | 02574-09

    Original file (02574-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5046 14

    Original file (NR5046 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2015. 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06779-07

    Original file (06779-07.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 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.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 10 September 1981. The recommendation was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00901-11

    Original file (00901-11.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, your request for discharge was granted and on 4 November 1985, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these Factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02604-02

    Original file (02604-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were sentenced to confinement at forfeitures of $400 per month for three paygrade E-l, and a bad conduct discharge. conviction of four periods of unauthorized absence totaling more than 96 days warranted severe...