Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10148-07
Original file (10148-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMW
Docket No: 10148-07
8 July 2008

 

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 2 July 2008. 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.

On 13 January 1981, you enlisted in the Navy at age 23 after
a prior period of honorable service in the Army. on
30 April 1981, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status

until 13 August 1981, a period of about 105 days. However, it
appears that no disciplinary action was taken for this offense.

During the period 16 September 1981 to 8 November 1985, you
were in a UA status on two occasions totaling about 1,407 days.

On 27 November 1985, you were convicted by a special court-

martial (SPCM) of the two periods of UA totaling 1,407 days.
The sentence included confinement at hard labor, reduction in

rank, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After the BCD was
approved at all levels of review, on 4 June 1986, you were so

discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
The Board also considered your contention that personal problems
may have contributed to your misconduct and belief that your
UA's are considered a misdemeanor. Nevertheless, the Board
found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your lengthy UA's and
conviction by a SPCM,. Furthermore, the two UA's for which you
were convicted by a court-martial are considered serious
offenses. Regarding your contention, personal problems do not
excuse misconduct. Therefore, 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

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.

The Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable
service in the Army, you may be eligible for veterans'
benefits. You should contact the nearest office of the
Department of Veterans Affairs if you desire clarification

about your eligibility for those benefits.
Sincerely,

Lenn

W. DEAN PF
Executive r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07998-06

    Original file (07998-06.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 17 April 1981 after two years of honorable service, On 7 June 1981 and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07529-07

    Original file (07529-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 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. About four months later, on 2 November 1984, you were convicted by SPCM of a 48 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 63...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10873-07

    Original file (10873-07.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. On 19 June 1980, you were convicted by a SPCM of the two instances of UA totaling 71 days. 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 | 07736-07

    Original file (07736-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel off the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. 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. ying for a correction of an official naval n the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11111-07

    Original file (11111-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. 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 | CY2007 | 06664-07

    Original file (06664-07.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 enlisted in the Navy on 1 September 1981 at age 21. On 21 September 1983, you were convicted by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03772-02

    Original file (03772-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2002. 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00712-08

    Original file (00712-08.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. On 9 April 1964, you were returned to military authorities after being in a UA status for about 120 days. 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 | 04503-07

    Original file (04503-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2008. You were also in a UA status during the period from 1 to 5 September 1989. 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 | 07598-07

    Original file (07598-07.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. 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...