DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 2317-09
19 February 2010
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 17 February 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 18 June 1978 at age 20 and began a
period of active duty on 28 June 1978. You served without
disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a
period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated until
you were apprehended by civil authorities on 3 April 1979.
However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action
taken, if any, for this misconduct. On 16 April 1979 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty.
In January 1980 you submitted a written request for an
administrative discharge for the good of the service in lieu of
conviction by court-martial for conspiracy to commit robbery,
robbery, receipt of stolen property, and communicating a threat.
Subsequently, this request was denied and the charges were
referred for court-martial. As a result, on 8 January 1980, you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of unlawfully
receiving stolen money, specifically, $20 and communicating
provoking words/threats. You were sentenced to a $750 forfeiture
of pay and confinement at hard labor for three months. During the
period from 29 May to 25 September 1980 you received NUP on three
more occasions for damaging government property, wrongful
appropriation of a $28 camera, assault, and two periods of UA
totalling three days. On 27 October 1980 you were apprehended by
Civil authorities on charges of possession of drugs, to include
marijuana, and drug paraphernalia.
On 23 June 1981 you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM)
of three periods of desertion, two periods of UA totalling 10
days, three specifications of making a false official statement,
escape, and 41 specifications of false or unauthorized pass
offenses. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 15
months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to
paygrade E-1, and a dishonorable discharge (DD). On 20 October
1981 you began another period of UA that was not terminated until
you were apprehended and held in confinement by civil authorities
on 19 January 1982. The record does not reflect the disciplinary
action taken, if any, for this period of UA,
On 8 September 1982 you received your fifth NUP for failure to go
to your appointed place of duty. Subsequently, the DD was
approved at all levels of review, and on 14 July 1983, you were
issued a DD.
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 assertion of completion of completion of a
“Recycle Program” which would automatically upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the
seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in five NUPs, and
two court-martial convictions, and included frequent and lengthy
periods of UA from the Navy. Finally, there is no evidence in
the record, and you submitted none, to support your assertion of
a “Recycle Program.” 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,
\Sp a
W. DEAN PF R
Executive Direttor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05822-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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. 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 | CY2007 | 02401-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2008. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted, and on 3 April 1980 you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10768-10
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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. On 3 September 1985, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06151-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 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. You served without disciplinary incident until 6 July 1978, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02544-09
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 warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of NUP, conviction by SPCM for periods of UA totaling over six months, and the fact that you were given a opportunity to earn a better characterization of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6077 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05544-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 27 April 2010. 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. 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 | CY2001 | 02131-01
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 28 June 1979 you During the period from 22 July 1979 to 26 August 1980 you were in a UA status on five occasions for a total of 272 days. materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your lengthy periods of UA, and your request for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07820-06
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 18 August 1976 at age 18. During this period of UA, you were convicted by...