DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TOR
Docket No: 7446-09
ii June 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 9 June 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 reguiations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by
the Board consisted of your application, together with all
Materiai 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 17 January 1978 at age 18 and served
for about five months without disciplinary infractions. However,
during the period from 30 May 1978 to 14 October 1980 you were in
an unauthorized absence (UA) status on four occasions. As a
result, on 8 December 1980, you were convicted by special court-
Martial of four periods of UA totalling 744 days and sentenced to
a $1,000 forfeiture of pay, confinement at hard labor for 60
days, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Subsequently, the BCD
was approved at all levels of review, and on 2 June 1982, you
were issued a BCD.
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 that you received inadequate legal
representation, were pushed through an administrative discharge
process, and were discharged because of low math skills.
Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
ef your repetitive and Lengthy periods of UA from the Navy.
Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted
none, to support our 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 oF injustice.
Sincerely,
Lda
W. DEAN T
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07289-09
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. 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 | 07289-09
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. 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 | CY2011 | 02346-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
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 | CY2009 | 02317-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. You served without disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00347-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2011. On 24 August 1981 you were again convicted by SPCM of a 258 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 60 days, a $600 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). 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 | CY2007 | 06381-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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. ...
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 | CY2003 | 07986-03
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 22 April 1977 at age 18. You were sentenced to confinement at...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01418-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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 25 June 1982 you began a period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities.