Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03424-08
Original file (03424-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 3424-08
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 15 November 1967, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with
parental consent. On 18 July 1968 and 23 January 1969, you

were convicted by special courts-martial (SPCM). Your offenses
included larceny of four wallets and $39 cash, and 37 days of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 4 March 1969, you began a period

of UA and on 7 March 1969, you were apprehended by civilian
authorities and held pending charges of transporting a stolen
motor vehicle across a state line. On 21 April 1969, you were
convicted in civil court of this offense and sentenced to three
years of probation. On 21 April 1969, you were returned to
military authorities after being UA for about 48 days. On

12 May 1969, you were convicted by a SPCM of the 48 day period
of UA. Your sentence included confinement at hard labor,
forfeitures of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After
the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on rs
16 January 1970, you were so discharged. 7
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 belief that your discharge would
be upgraded after six months. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of
your misconduct. Furthermore, there is no provision in the law
or regulations that allows for recharacterization of service
due solely to the passage of time. 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,

Qed

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di 4

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01704-09

    Original file (01704-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR Docket No: 1704-09 15 December 2009 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 8 December 2009. On 27 July and 3 September 1970, you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling 13 days. Nevertheless, these factors were...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09486-08

    Original file (09486-08.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. 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 | CY2009 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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 | CY2008 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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 | CY2008 | 04439-08

    Original file (04439-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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. During the period 15 to 26 May 1968, while still in Vietnam, you were in a UA status.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08002-08

    Original file (08002-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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. , Finally, the Board noted that you were issued a clemency discharge under the provisions of PP-4313, but concluded that a further change, which would make you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01398-09

    Original file (01398-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, his naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. However, the convening authority suspended your BCD for a period of 12 months. 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 | 00162-08

    Original file (00162-08.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. During this 105 day period of UA you were also declared a deserter. 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 | 03848-08

    Original file (03848-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 | 12082-09

    Original file (12082-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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...