Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04420-09
Original file (04420-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ‘
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SoN
Docket No: 04420-09
9 April 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.

R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your

application on 6 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, cogether 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 4 January 1989 after serving over
nine years of honorable service. On 27 June 1990 and 7 January
1991, you were counseled regarding your failure to pay your
debts, making overdrafts, having overdrawn accounts, and
a@isobedience. You were warned that further deficiencies in your
performance or conduct could result in administrative discharge
action. On 2 June 1991, you were convicted by special court~
martial (SPCM) of two specifications of forgery and larceny. You
were sentenced to confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay,
4 reduction in paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). You
received the BCD after appellate review was completed.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, prior
honorable service, and overall record of your last period of
service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your conviction by SPCM for serious offenses. 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.
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.

Sincerely,
W. DEAN PF E
Executive rettor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04799-09

    Original file (04799-09.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. 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 | 02589-09

    Original file (02589-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 05009-09

    Original file (05009-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in three NUJP’s and one SPCM conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03375-09

    Original file (03375-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. You received the BCD after appellate review was completed. 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 | CY2011 | 05801-11

    Original file (05801-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2012. Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NJP for wrongful drug use, SPCM conviction of a lengthy period of UA, and the fact that you had two additional periods of UA totaling over two months prior to...

  • 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 | 13316-09

    Original file (13316-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 10716-10

    Original file (10716-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 August 2011. 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. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7406 13

    Original file (NR7406 13.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. Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NJP, and conviction by SPCM of a period of UA that lasted over 14 months, ending with your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11162-09

    Original file (11162-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. On 5 June 1974 you submitted a written request for immediate execution of the BCD. gConsequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the g@eistence of probable material error or injustice.