DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 10587-10
26 duly 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 20 July 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,
ang policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
+o establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 23 May 1986. On 3 August 1987, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NTP) for being in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status for 28 days, and missing your
ship’s movement. On 22 April 1988, you were convicted at a
special court-martial (SPCM) of failure to go to your appointed
place of duty, being UA for 33 days, and missing your ship’s
movement. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of $200,
confinement at hard labor for 20 days, and a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). The discharge authority directed the execution
of your BCD. On 15 June 1985, after appellate review, you were
so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given your record of one NUP and conviction by
SPCM of 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.
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,
Woo SRY
W. DEAN PFEGF
Executive D YG
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09134-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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 | 08241-10
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 | 05129-10
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. Cofisequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03003-10
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. A year later, on 28 November 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 268 day period of UA. On 2 March 1970 you submitted a written request for remission of the BCD and to be issued a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11653-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 01226-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered ‘your application on 9 November 2010. On 4 November 1985, after appellate review, you were so discharged. 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 | 08348-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. “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 | 05791-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | 10118-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 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 existencetof probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12505-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 August 2011. On 29 March 1953, you were convicted by summary court-martial (scM) of unauthorized absence {UA) from your unit for a period of 78 days and missing ship’s movement. 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.