DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 7268-14
30 July 2015
Dear
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.
Although your application was not filed ina timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute
of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on
24 June 2015. 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
9 February 1979. You served for four months without
disciplinary incident, but during the period from 13 June 1979
to 22 October 1979, you received nonjudicial punish (NUP) on
three occasions. Your offenses were larceny, unauthorized
absence (UA) and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
On 4 February 1983, you were convicted by special court-martial
of UA from your unit for a period of 870 days. The sentence
imposed was confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay anda
bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 9 November 1983, you received
the BCD after appellate review was complete.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in a period of UA lasting over two years and four
months. Finally, there is no provision of law or in Navy
regulations that allows for recharacterization of service 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 within one year from the date of the Board’s
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. [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,
ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5421 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR850 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. Asa ceault of this action, on 5 August 1980, you were convicted by SPCM of 328 day period of UA, and the suspended BCD was then remitt d. Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all levels of review, and on 24 November 198C yOu were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02451-01
Your allegations of error and considered your 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. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, including drug abuse and assault, which resulted in five conviction. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01207-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04140-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 6 November 1980 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $125 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 14 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7371 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 2015. 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 | CY2014 | NR5367 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2015. 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 | CY2008 | 00071-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08621-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2007. 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 enlisted in the Navy on 6 July 1979 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident until 24 March 1980, when you received nonjudicial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03787-09
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...