DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 01959-08
12 November 2008
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 October 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.
You enlisted in the Navy on 2 October 1978, and served without
disciplinary incident, until 21 September 1979, when you were in
an unauthorized absence status for a period of approximately
seven months, from 21 September 1979 to 24 April 1980. Upon your
return, you were pending a special court-martial (SPCM) for
desertion. However, after consulting with legal counsel, you
requested a separation in lieu of a SPCM with an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge. The separation authority approved the
request and you were discharged with an OTH and an RE-4
reenlistment code on 23 June 1980.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code because of
your serious misconduct. Furthermore, the Board believed that
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. The
Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your
bargain with the Navy when your request for discharge was granted
and you should not be permitted to change it now. 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,
a
W. DEAN PFET
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00353-08
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 7 November 1979, you received a special court- martial (SPCM) and were found guilty of four specifications of UA. 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 | 10573-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2009. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and the passage of time. 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 | 07486-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01646-08
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 14 March 1979, you were separated with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge, and an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | 09317-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2009. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth. 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 | 00351-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2008. Additionally, on 6 November 1981, you were sent to a special court-martial (SPCM) for charges of UA, possession of an illegal drug and drug paraphernalia. 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 | CY2010 | 08466-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2011. 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 | 09066-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. 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 | 05933-07
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 Marine Corps on 7 June 1979 at age 17. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06128-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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...