Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12749-09
Original file (12749-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

 

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

BAN
Docket No: 12749-09
7 September 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 26 August 2010. 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

It UST. Ce «

You enlisted in the Navy on 16 June 1987, and served without
disciplinary incident until 13 January 1988, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence (UA) in
excess of 45 days. Shortly thereafter, you were convicted ata
special court-martial (SPCM) of three specifications of UA
totaling three months and five days. Your sentence at the SPCM
included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After appellate review,
on 20 September 1989, you were separated from the naval service
with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code.

 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and belief that enough time has elapsed to warrant
upgrading your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your repeated and lengthy periods of
UA. Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations
that allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the
passage of time. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00610-10

    Original file (00610-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No: 00610-10 22 September 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 21 September 2010. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09573-09

    Original file (09573-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. It also considered your assertion of personal family matters occurring at the time you were serving in the Navy, which presumably resulted in your periods of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09299-09

    Original file (09299-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 03531-09

    Original file (03531-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2] January 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. 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 | CY2010 | 03878-09

    Original file (03878-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2010. On 7 January 1953, you were convicted by SPCM of an 18 day period of UA from your unit. 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 | CY2009 | 11653-09

    Original file (11653-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 03926-09

    Original file (03926-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 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 requested suspension of the BCD and restoration to earn an honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10980-09

    Original file (10980-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2010. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your three NUP’s, SCM, and especially your SPCM conviction for very serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01780-09

    Original file (01780-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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 23 May 1984 you received your third NUP for a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction for 15 days and a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13180-09

    Original file (13180-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...