Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10363-08
Original file (10363-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TUR
Docket No: 10363-08
1 October 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 Sy
application on 29° September 2009. The names and votes of che
members of the panel will be furnished upon request... Your
allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance
with administrative regulations and procedures applicabie to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by
the Board consisted of your application, together with ail
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 probabie material error or
injustice.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 30 September 1966. A year later,
on 7 October 1967, you began a 138 day period of unauthorized
absence (UA) that was not terminated until 22 February 1968, when
you were apprehended by civil authorities. Shortly thereafter,
on 26 March: 1968, ° you began another period of UA that was not.
terminated until 20 August 1969 when you were apprehended by
Federal Bureau of Investigation agents. During both of the
foregoing periods of UA, you were declared a deserter,
Subsequently, on 20 September 1968, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totalling 285 days...
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for three months
and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).

On 2 December 1968 you waived restoration to duty and to have
your case reviewed for clemency by a parole board. Your
statement was, in part, as follows:
I have too many problems at home and I feel that I can’t go
back to duty and be a good Sailor. Because of this, I have
to have a discharge. Because of my problems, I know that Tf
can no longer obligate myself to the Navy. I know and feel
it will be better to me and to the Navy if I were
discharged.

During the period from 8 December 1968 to 23 April 1969 you were
again in a UA status and also declared a deserter. Nonetheless,
the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if

any, for this misconduct. Subsequently, the BCD was approved at
all levels of review, and on 14 May 1969 you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed. all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertions of family and personal pEepiems
‘Neverthéless;, ‘the: Board ‘concluded these factors were. not~ : a
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your BCD because of oe
the seriousness of your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA.
Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted.
none, to support your assertions. Accordingly, your application
has been denied. : - -

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,

\ Quen DQ)

W. DEAN PF
Executive Di r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02323-09

    Original file (02323-09.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 February 2010. 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...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 04389-09

    Original file (04389-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. About six months later, on 8 January 1969, he received NUP for a nine day period 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 | 08014-08

    Original file (08014-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 09542-08

    Original file (09542-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s 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. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03761-07

    Original file (03761-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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. On 10 May 1971 an ADB recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01548 12

    Original file (01548 12.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 December 2012. 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 25 February 1970 you submitted a written request for clemency, specifically, a reduction in confinement, mitigation of the DD, and the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07427-05

    Original file (07427-05.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 March 1968 at age 18. As a result, on 5 March 1971, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06492-07

    Original file (06492-07.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. 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 | 11222-09

    Original file (11222-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. 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 13 January 1971 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...