DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 753-12
25 October 2012
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 23 October 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 11 October 1983 after more than
three years of prior satisfactory service. You continued to
serve without disciplinary incident until 6 March 1985, when you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 67 days and missing the
movement of your ship. You were sentenced to confinement for 60
days, a $300 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, anda
bad conduct discharge (BCD). Subsequently, the BCD was approved
at all levels of review and on 2 June 1986, you were so
discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your prior honorable service and desire to upgrade your
discharge. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the
seriousness of your misconduct and lengthy period of UA from the
Navy. 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 official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
RMD | i cen y
ROBERT D.“ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04719-11
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00903 12
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 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. On 28 October 1976, you received NUP for being UA for 20 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00777-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. 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 | 04542-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. Furthermore, on 15 June 1965, you were convicted again at a SPCM of UA in excess of 32 days and of failing to obey a lawful order. 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 | 05244-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2012. Therefore, you were separated with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your conviction at a SPCM. 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 | CY2012 | 00223 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2012. 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 SPCM conviction of a period of UA that lasted over 10 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09702 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 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. You were also in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for a period of six days for which no disciplinary action was taken.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03422-11
‘ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. Nevertheless, these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct and your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA from the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00468 12
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00504 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2012. 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...