Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09253-08
Original file (09253-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BIG
Docket No: 9253-08

7 July 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 July 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 and medical records,
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. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 8 January 1980. You received a special
court-martial for larceny of military property valued at
approximately $700.00 and unauthorized absence (UA) totaling

' about 135 days. The punishment included a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). After appellate review, on 30 March 1984, you
received the BCD.

‘The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
_ Nevertheless, the Board concluded that this factor was not
sufficient to warrant changing your BCD because of your serious
misconduct and lengthy period of UA. In view of the above,
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,

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09244-08

    Original file (09244-08.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 July 2009. 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. 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 | 09535-08

    Original file (09535-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 18 August 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. You were sentenced to confinement for eight months and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01929-09

    Original file (01929-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all IMaterial submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 21 April 1978, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 599 day period of UA from your unit. 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 | 10085-08

    Original file (10085-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material, submitted in support thereof, your naval and medical records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. ntious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08942-08

    Original file (08942-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03391-08

    Original file (03391-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00589-09

    Original file (00589-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2009. On 7 November 1974, you received a third NJP for an additional 16 days 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 | 03424-08

    Original file (03424-08.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 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. On 12 May 1969, you were convicted by a SPCM of the 48 day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08761-08

    Original file (08761-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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 | 05398-09

    Original file (05398-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...