DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SUN
Docket No: 03817-11
15 February 2012
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 14 February 2012. 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 enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
27 March 1980. The Board found that you were convicted by a
special court-martial (SPCM) of 458 days of unauthorized absence
(UA). You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor, a
forfeiture of pay, and a reduction in paygrade. On 3 December
1982, you were released from confinement and restored to full
duty. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further
misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. On
2 November 1983, you were convicted by a second SPCM of two
specifications of UA totaling 65 days. You were sentenced to
confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, and a bad
conduct discharge (BCD). You received the BCD on 1 February
1985 after appellate review was completed.
The Board, in its review of your record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge, and belief that
your characterization of service would be automatically upgraded
after two years. Nevertheless, based on the information
currently contained in your record, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge given your two SPCM convictions of periods of UA
totaling over 17 months. The Board also noted that you were
given a chance for retention, and to earn a better
characterization of service when you were restored to full duty
after your first SPCM for a very lengthy period of UA. Finally,
you are advised that there is no provision of law or in Navy
regulations that allows for recharacterization automatically
after two years or due solely to the passage of time.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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 effiicial
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN P I
Executive Winddctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04031-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 January 2008. 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 5 November 1965 and 3 March 1967, you received two more NUJP’s for a four-day period of UA and another period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05183-03
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 8 December 1952 at age 17. On 23 November 1953 you received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05649 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 February 2012. 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 | CY2011 | 04942 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2012. 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 | CY2009 | 01177-09
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 a forfeiture of pay, confinement at hard labor, a reduction in paygrade, 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 material error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04308-06
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 4 December 1953 at age 18. About six months later, on 23 June...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07019-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2006. 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 | CY2008 | 03391-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2009. 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 error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07821-07
You were sentenced to a reduction in paygrade, confinement at hard labor, and a forfeiture of pay. On 16 January 1980, you were convicted by a second SPCM of two specifications of UA totaling 186 days and assault with a deadly weapon. 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 | 04414-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 December 2010. 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...