Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07736-07
Original file (07736-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARG FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 7736-07
20 August 2008

 

This is in reference tlo your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant |to the provisions of Title 10, United

States Code, Section 1/552.

A three-member panel off the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 19 August 2008. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary naferial considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval retord, and applicable statutes, regulations,

and policies.

After careful and cons¢ientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient

to establish the existeé¢nce of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 2 February 1978 at age 18
and served without disdiplinary incident until 13 July 1978, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to obey a
lawful order. The punijshment imposed was restriction and extra
duty for 45 days and a |$396 forfeiture of pay.

Your record also reflects a five hour period of absence from your
appointed place of duty and 12 periods of unauthorized absence
(UA) totalling 49 days during the period from 14 June 1979 to 10
April 1981. However, the record does not reflect the
disciplinary action taken, if any, for these periods of absence.
Nevertheless, on 15 May| 1981, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of| three periods of UA totalling 687 days.
You were sentenced to confinement for six months, a $660
forfeiture of pay, and B bad conduct discharge (BCD).
During the period from 7 July 1981 to 22 February 1985 you were
again in a UA status dn two occasions for 1,315 days and declared
a deserter on both ocdasions. However, the record does not
reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for these
absences. Nonetheless,| after the BCD was approved at all levels
of review, on 28 February 1986 you were so discharged.

ew of your entire record and application,
potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and assertijons that you requested help, but did not
receive any, for your \diagnosed mental health issues, you
informed your superions of your suffering from depression and an
acute panic disorder but were not taken seriously, and that your

The Board, in its revi
carefully weighed all

periods of UA were tos
Nevertheless, the Boar

sufficient to warrant E
because of the serious

of UA, which resulted
evidence in the record
assertions. According

fe

1

The names and votes of
upon request.

It is regretted that th
favorable action cannot
Board reconsider its de
evidence or other matt
In this regard, it is

presumption of regular
Consequently, when app
record, the burden is

 

D

eek help for your mental health problems.
concluded these factors were not
echaracterization of your discharge

ess of your repetitive and lengthy periods

n a court-martial conviction. There is no
and you submitted none, to support your

y, your application has been denied.

the members of the panel will be furnished

e circumstances of your case are such that
be taken. You are entitled to have the
cision upon submission of new and material
xr not previously considered by the Board.

mportant to keep in mind that a

ty attaches to all official records.

ying for a correction of an official naval
n the applicant to demonstrate the

existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

  

Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05634-07

    Original file (05634-07.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 27 January 1978 after four years of prior honorable service. After the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09384-02

    Original file (09384-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2013 | NR4550 13

    Original file (NR4550 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 15 April 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08057-07

    Original file (08057-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 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. It also considered your post service psychiatric, mental, and/or medical evaluations and the character reference letters submitted in support of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04265-02

    Original file (04265-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 | CY2010 | 05796-10

    Original file (05796-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07596-07

    Original file (07596-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2008. 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 recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05297-10

    Original file (05297-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2011. On 29 July 1981, you were again convicted by SPCM of the forgoing period of UA and sentenced to 90 days confinement, forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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 | CY2008 | 05252-08

    Original file (05252-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 | CY2007 | 04588-07

    Original file (04588-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 18 March 1976 at age 18. After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on 25 November 1980 you were so discharged.The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating...