DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJIR
Docket No: 347-11
17 October 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 October 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 14 September 1978 after four years
of prior service and continued to serve without disciplinary
incident until 17 July 1979, when you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of a 45 day period unauthorized absence
(UA). On 3 September 1980 you were convicted by SPCM of two
periods of VA totalling 92 days.
On 24 August 1981 you were again convicted by SPCM of a 258 day
period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 60
days, a $600 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all levels of
review and on 15 December 1982 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentialiy mitigating factors, such as
your period of prior satisfactory service and desire to upgrade
your discharge. It also considered your assertion that you
should have received a hardship discharge. Nevertheless, these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive and
lengthy periods of UA from the Navy which resulted in three
SPCMs. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
It ig 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,
lel
W. DEAN PF E
Executive Dsrettor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06291-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 01537-11
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 9 August 1973 you were ‘convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 27 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $408 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge {BCD}. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06268-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 4 February 1969, you were again UA from your unit until you were apprehended one 28 June 1969, by the Federal Breaual of Investigation (FBI), in McClure, Pennsylvania, a period of 138 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...
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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04189-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11469-10
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 found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a SPCM and periods of UA totaling over 11 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01165-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your record, however, does not reflect the court action or sentence for the foregoing charge. 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 | 04730-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 2011. On 17 July 1969 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totalling 123 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...