Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07489-10
Original file (07489-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 7489-10
30 March 2011

 

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 29 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 17 March 1986. You
received nonjudicial punishment for unauthorized absence ( (UA)
(two specifications totaling six days) ) and absence from your
appointed place of duty. Your record is incomplete, but on 6
February 1987, you were convicted at a special court-martial of
two periods of UA totaling seven days, failure to obey a lawful
order, and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.
your sentence included a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 24
June 1988, 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,
remorse, and post service good conduct. However, the Board
concluded that your BCD should not be changed due to your
misconduct. 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
rand 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,
Ls |

W. DEAN PF
Executive Dire

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06877-10

    Original file (06877-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 | CY2010 | 08115-10

    Original file (08115-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 2011. On 24 February 1987, after appellate review, you received the 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 | 04204-10

    Original file (04204-10.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 January 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 | 11864-10

    Original file (11864-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 08080-10

    Original file (08080-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 2011. On 23 September 1985, after appellate review, you received the 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 | CY2011 | 02645-11

    Original file (02645-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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 | 10854-10

    Original file (10854-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. The sentence of your second SPCM included a bad conduct discharge (BCD).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09258-10

    Original file (09258-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2011. On 7 June 1968, you were convicted by a SPCM of a UA totaling 31 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 | 09246-10

    Original file (09246-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05719-10

    Original file (05719-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 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 15 February 1957, you received NUP for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period of six days.