DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 1348-il
3 November 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 2 November 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
_to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You reenlisted in the Navy on 6 December 1985 after more than
five years of prior honorable service. Based on the information
currently contained in your record it shows that you were
convicted by general court-martial of charges including fraud,
larceny and wrongful appropriation. The sentence imposed was
‘confinement, reduction in paygrade and a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). Although the separation documentation is not in your
record, it clearly reflects that on 29 January 2001, after
appellate review, you received a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable
record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge. Finally, there is no provision of law of in
Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of service
due solely to the passage of time. 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,
Ls Dee
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Dilte
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07269-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN Docket No: 07269-10 31 March 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 30 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04227-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BAN _ Docket No: 04227-10 13 January 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 13 January 2011. ‘Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05655-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and belief that your offenses do not warrant a 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02596-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 December 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 | CY2011 | 01601-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your appiication on 9 November 2011. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. Consequentiy, 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 | 05378-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 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 | CY2011 | 00666-11
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. 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 | CY2011 | 00955-11
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. The Board found that you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a five day period of unauthorized absence. 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 | 00958-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 2 November 2011. On 27 February 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of being UA on three occasions totaling 1,082 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 | 08469-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. You were sentenced to confinement for nine months, forfeiture of all allowances and pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).