DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
, 701 S&S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
a CRS .
u . Docket No: 11758-12
11 April 2014
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 17 October 2013. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceeding 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 9 Tamuary 1980.
On 17 July 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment for
unspecified offenses.
On 25 January 1985 a special court-martial convened, found you
guilty of two periods of unauthorized absence totaling 81 days,
and sentenced you to confinement at hard labor for three months,
reduction in pay grade, forfeitures of $250.00 per month for
three months, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). You were
separated with a BCD on 17 September 1985 after appellate
review. .
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed
ali potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
record of service, and the unsubstantiated contention that your
discharge had been previously upgraded. The Board concluded
that these factors were insufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your service, given the serious nature of
your misconduct, which ultimately resulted in your discharge.
Regarding your contention, there is no evidence in your record
to support it, and you have provided no such evidence.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the-panel will be furnished.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Boar. 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,
(Pe St
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01232-01
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. in support of your contention, evidence. 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 | CY2008 | 04254-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2009. 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 18 October 1983, you had NUP for use of marijuana.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11656-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on il August 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of one NUP...
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 | CY2011 | 03817-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00931-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 26 March 1981 you were convicted by SPCM of two incidents of larceny in the amount of $310, government vehicle, and communicating a threat. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
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 | CY2011 | 00560-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2011. On 25 January 1980, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period three 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 | CY2002 | 02370-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 2002. 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. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05544-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, slbhting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...