DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5106
BAN
Docket No: 09355-08
10 August 2009
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 5 August 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 11 October 1983, and served without
disciplinary incident. However, on 6 March 1985, you referred
yourself to the medical department for alcohol abuse. You were
also pending charges for an unauthorized absence (UA) in excess
of five days. . During this time, you also self-admitted to the
use of an illegal controlled substance (marijuana).
Shortly thereafter, you went UA and were declared a deserter. On
27 June 1986, you were apprehended by the local authorities and
returned to military jurisdiction; you were UA for approximately
13 months. On 21 July 1986, you received nonjudicial punishment
(NIP) for five specifications of UA. Further, on 30 July 1986,
you were convicted at a special court-martial (SPCM) for UA. You
received a bad conduct discharge (BCD) as part of your sentence.
After appellate review, on 10 February 1986, you were separated
from the naval service with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code
due to your SPCM conviction.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed ail potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, medical issues, and belief that enough time has
elapsed to warrant upgrading your discharge. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your misconduct. Further, there is no provision in the law or
regulations that allows for recharacterization of service due
solely to the passage of time. 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,
\ang
W. DEAN PF
Executive Drreector
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09403-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2009. On 8 September 1986 you received NUP for a 31 day period of unauthorized absence (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 | CY2007 | 03822-07
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 Navy on 8 November 1983 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02605-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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 | CY2008 | 07579-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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 | 12222-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _ application on 4 November 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. Therefore, on 17 July 1930, you were separated from the naval service with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your conviction at the SPCM.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07724-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. On 1 December 1988, after appellate review, you were separated from the naval service with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your conviction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07498-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2009. It also considered your assertion that you were told that you were being discharged under an “early-out” program and that your discharge would be automatically upgraded six months after your separation from the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01431-09
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. You received the BCD after appellate review was completed. 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 | CY2009 | 02686-09
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 | 08761-08
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...