DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION GF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX _
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 00342-09
5 November 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. oo
' A three-member panel of the Board for Correction.of Naval.
“Records, sitting in executive session, considered your |
application on 21 October 2009. Your allegations of error and —
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documeritary 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 and were to begin a period of active
duty on 9 July 1984, at age 18. On 2 January 1985 you entered an
unauthorized absence (UA) status, which continued until
4 August i985, when you returned. On 9 September 1988, you were >
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) for being UA a total of
1,056.days. You were sentenced to 120 days confinement at hard
labor and forfeiture of $1,760 and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
The BCD was approved at all levels of review on 28 November 1988,
and you were so discharged on 20 December 1988.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct,
and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the
reenlistment code or characterization of your discharge, given
your conviction by SPCM of a very lengthy period of UA. The
Board also noted that you waived the right to an ADB, your best
opportunity for retention or a better characterization of
service. 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,
W. DEAN PF
_ EBxecutive D xr
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 | 07682-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 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 | 12362-08
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. 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 | 01419-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 2009. 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 material...
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 | CY2009 | 00965-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to change the reason for your discharge given your SPCM conviction for a period of UA that lasted over three months, the diagnosed personality disorder that stated, in part, that you were a danger to others, and NUP...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03726-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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 | 02574-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07375-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2011. The sentence imposed was confinement for 30 days, hard labor without confinement for 30 days, restriction for 30 days anda forfeiture of pay. 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: v .
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...