DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 161-10
3 May 2010
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 28 April 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 18 September
1987. On 28 June 1989 you were convicted by a special court-
martial of numerous unauthorized absences and violation of
orders. The court sentenced you to a forfeiture of $100.00,
confinement at hard labor for two months, reduction in rank, and
a bad conduct discharge. You were absent without authority from
2 October 1989 to 4 October 1991. You were separated from the
Navy on 4 December 1991 with a bad conduct discharge upon your
return to military control. ‘
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
service record, and the contention that you ha@ posttraumatic
stress disorder (PTSD) that caused your misconduct. The Board
concluded that those factors were insufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your service. Further, there is no
credible evidence that you suffered from PTSD while in the Navy.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of. the panel will be furnished upon request.
it 1s 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13316-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. On 31 August 1990, the discharge authority directed the execution of your 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 error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR13277 14
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. “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 | CY2010 | 04295-10
The Board did not consider your request for correction of your reentry code as that request was previously denied, and you have not submitted any new material evidence concerning that request. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. 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 | 00021-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. On 30 August 1989, you received NJP for UA Erom your appointed place of duty. 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 | 10943-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02589-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 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. The discharge authority directed the execution of your’ BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR13277 14_Redacted
A three-member’ panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, ‘considered your application on 6 January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2010 | 04799-09
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 | 06168-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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. On 3 October 1991, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04420-09
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2010. You were warned that further deficiencies in your performance or conduct could result in administrative discharge action. Congequently, 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.