Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06877-10
Original file (06877-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 6877-10
9 March 2011

 

EY Geir

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 8 March 2011. 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.

You entered active duty in the Navy on 11 July 1977. You
received nonjudicial punishment for larceny. You then entered
two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling more than

seven years. On 30 September 1985, you were convicted at a
special court-martial of the two periods of UA. Your sentence
included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 11 June 1986, after

appellate review, you received the BCD.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
psychiatric problems. However, the Board concluded that your
BCD should not be changed due to your lengthy periods of UA
totaling more than seven years. You are advised that no
discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post
service good conduct. In view of the above, 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 evidehce or other matter not previously considered
by the Board. Im 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,

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dixvecto

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07489-10

    Original file (07489-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 2011. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR3839-13

    Original file (NR3839-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your sentence at the SPCM included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Nevertheless, the Board. 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 | 10909-10

    Original file (10909-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a period of UA totaling 226 days. 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 | 08241-10

    Original file (08241-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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. On 25 November 1950, you were again convicted by SPCM of UA from your unit for a period of three days and sentenced to 30 days confinement, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06087-10

    Original file (06087-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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 applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07707-01

    Original file (07707-01.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 May 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12407-10

    Original file (12407-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | CY2007 | 03883-07

    Original file (03883-07.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Navy on 9 September 1977 at age 17 and served for seven months without...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03390-06

    Original file (03390-06.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 30 December 1965 at age 17. During the period from 12 January to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05812-00

    Original file (05812-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. recommended you be issued an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...