DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS.
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 3419-08
8 January 2009
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 7 January 2009. 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.
On 29 January 1990, you enlisted in the Navy at age
19. During the period 8 April to 30 June 1991, you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status on two occasions totaling
about 81 days. On 12 August 1991, you were convicted by a
special court-martial of these offenses. Your sentence
included confinement, reduction in rank, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). Based on the information currently contained
in the record, it appears that the BCD was approved at all
levels of review. On 27 October 1992, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth,
regret for your misconduct, and desire for a better discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due
to the seriousness of your 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 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,
Ion
W. DEAN PF
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01590-09
- A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 07353-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02082-08
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. Subsequently, on 20 December 1991, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06507-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2009. On 28 March 1991 you received your fourth NJP for three periods of failure to,go to your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $800 forfeiture of pay, restriction for 30 days, and reduction to paygrade E-2. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04048-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2009. 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 | CY2008 | 02017-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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 | 00085-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2009. 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 | CY2008 | 02874-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2008. The separation authority approved these recommendations and directed an OTH discharge with an RE-4 reenlistment code, and on 18 October 1991, you were so discharged. 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 | 08047-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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 | 01841-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 2009. Additionally, you waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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.