DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20570-58100
TAL
Docket No: 01929-09
7 December 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 24 November 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 IMaterial 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 began a period of active duty on 21
January 1977 at age 18. On 16 July 1977, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a three day period of
unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit. On 22 July 1977, you
received NUP for two instances of UA from your appointed place of
duty. On 28 October 1977, you received NUP for a nine day period
of UA from your unit. On 28 September 1978, you received NUP for
a nine day period of UA from your unit. On 26 October 1978, you
received NIP for a 19 day period of UA from your unit. On 7
December 1978, you received NUP for an eight day period of UA
from your unit. On 21 April 1978, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of a 599 day period of UA from your unit.
You were sentenced to 60 days of confinement and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). You received the BCD after appellate review was
completed.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant réecharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in six NUJP’s and one SPCM conviction for a period of UA
that lasted over one year and seven months. 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 hdve 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05042-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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 | CY2011 | 03331-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 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. Your offenses were two specifications of disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, two periods of UA totalling two days, assault, and two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8164 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2014. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05252-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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 | 09073-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations, and policies. On 17 August 1979, your case was forwarded and on 28 August 1979, the separation authority directed your separation by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4500 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. Five months later, on 11 July 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 78 days, and was sentenced to a $530 forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement for two months and a suspended bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07171-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. 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. Between 14 March and 4 June 1978, you commenced three periods of UA, the first period lasting six days, the second period lasting 27 days, and the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04588-07
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 18 March 1976 at age 18. After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on 25 November 1980 you were so discharged.The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating...
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...