DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 06429-10
14 April 2011
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 12 April 2011. 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 and began a period of active duty on
8 November 1971. The Board found that during the period from
2 August 1973 to 7 May 1974, you received four nonjudicial
punishments (NUP’s) for use of disrespectful language,
disobedience, possession of marijuana, mescaline, and lysergic
acid diethylamide (LSD), and absence from your appointed place of
duty. On 7 May 1976, you were convicted by general court-martial
(GCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 526
days. You were sentenced to a reduction in paygrade, confinement
at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). You received the BCD on 8 April 1977 after appellate
review was completed.
The Board, in its review of your record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, Vietnam service, and desire to upgrade your
discharge. 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 four NJP’s and GCM conviction of periods of UA
totaling over 17 months. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
‘favorable action cannot be tgken. 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,
Executive Di c
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11389-10
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive gession, considered your application on 2 August 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. 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 | CY2010 | 11523-10
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 concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NJP and GCM conviction of periods of UA totaling over 12 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11234-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. 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 | 08758-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2008. 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. As a result, on 2 September 1960, you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of three periods of UA totalling 184 days and sentenced to a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07019-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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 | CY2010 | 05064-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 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. ‘Consequently, when gpplying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00440-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10982-10
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. As a result, on 27 January 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09290-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 May 2011. 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 | 09041-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...