DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX TRG
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 . Docket No: 2072-09
2 June 2009
Dea
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 27 May 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 13 June 1999 and subsequently
reenlisted. On 18 June 2007 you received nonjudicial punishment
for disobedience. A special court-martial convened on 8 May 2008
and convicted you of three specifications of making a false
official statement and two specificattions of larceny. The court
sentenced you to reduction in rate, 85 days confinement and
forfeitures of pay, the collection of which was deferred.
On 14 July 2008 you were notified of discharge processing by
reason of misconduct due to your commission of serious offenses. .
In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the
right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board. In hig recommendation for discharge, the commanding
Stated that you had submitted false travel claims and other
~“gocuments which resulted in you frauditentty receiving basic
allowances for housing and travel reimbursement in the amount of
$14,478.84. After review, the discharge authority directed
discharge under other than honorable conditions and you were so
discharged on 24 July 2008.
In your application you are requesting that the special court-
martial be overturned and removed from your record, that your
indebtedness be removed, your paygrade be reinstated to E-5 and
your discharge be upgraded. In support of your request you have
submitted a copy of a court order dated 28 August 2008 requiring
‘that you pay support for a child born on 25 November 2003. You
are apparently contending that support of this child justified
your submission of the documents which resulted in your
conviction by court-martial.
Please be advised that the Board is prevented by law from
reviewing courts-martial and must limit its review to determining
if the sentence should be reduced as a matter of clemency. The
Board was aware that the offenses for which you were convicted
involved claiming that you were still married when you had
divorced. Given the offenses for which you were convicted, it
appears that the punishment was not too severe.
It is clear that the subsequent processing for an administrative
discharge based on the court-martial conviction was authorized by
regulations. Further, you were given the opportunity to request
an administrative discharge board to contest the discharge
processing but elected to waive that right. That was clearly
your last and best opportunity to be retained in the Navy. The
Board concluded that the discharge processing was proper and that
it was proper as issued.
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,
Wea 0)
W. DEAN PF
Executive ré¢tor
NAVY | DRB | 2009_Navy | ND0901378
The Applicant contends his discharge, based on a conviction at a SPCM, was unjust because he had an illegitimate dependent child (but didn’t know “ where he was or how to contact the mother ” ), and thus, was justified in receiving government funds for a dependent. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1100717
Based on the , command administratively processed for separation. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall . ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501530
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article91, insubordinate conduct, Article 107, false official statement, Article 108,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02245-11
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. The Board did-not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00518-10
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. In this regard, the Board concluded the sentence imposed was fair. 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 | CY2002 | 00870-01
870-01 24 January 2002 Dear Mr.- 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. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 16 January 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11974-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 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. The Board found that you were discharged from the Navy on 17 June 1993 with a bad conduct discharge, pursuant ‘to the approved sentence of a...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000544
The Applicant contends his rights were violated, because his command’s decision to conduct NJP proceedings based solely on allegations [instead of facts]did not afford him the opportunity to consult with counsel and properly prepare a defense. He also alleges the command’s Sergeant Major advised him not to file an appeal to the NJP conducted on 20 March 2009, further contending his rights were violated and that the command acted improperly.The NDRB found evidence in the Applicant’s service...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02599-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was ansufficient to establish the...
NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400099
Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...