Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7997 14
Original file (NR7997 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TIR
Bocket No: 7997-14
27 March 2015

 

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.

Although your application was not filed in a 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 17
March 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 27
May 1975. You served without disciplinary infraction for about a
year and two months. However, during the period from 29 July
1976 to 22 March 1978, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA)
Status on seven occasions. Asa result, on 7 August 1978, you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of seven periods
of UA totalling 382 days, and sentenced to a bad conduct
discharge (BCD). Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all
levels of review and on 31 August 1978, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your record, although incomplete, and
application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors, such as your desire to upgrade your discharge so that
you May seek employment as a security guard and assertion of
receiving improper legal counsel. It also considered the
character reference letters provided in support of your request,
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to-warrant recharacterization of -your discharge
because of the seriousness of your repeated and lengthy periods
of UA, which resulted in your BCD. 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

within one year from the date of the Board's decision. 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’NEILUL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5349 14

    Original file (NR5349 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 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. On 13 June 1978, you received NUP for a seven day period of UA from your unit.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2015 | NR1422 15

    Original file (NR1422 15.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4296 14

    Original file (NR4296 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4296 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR4296 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5421 14

    Original file (NR5421 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | NR5108 14

    Original file (NR5108 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 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. On 22 May 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 79 day period of UA and sentenced to a $97 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, confinement...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6437 14

    Original file (NR6437 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1998 14

    Original file (NR1998 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A ‘three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 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. ' In this regard, you submitted a request for a general discharge based on your overall record of service, -However,; an ADB and your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR04500 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR4500 14

    Original file (NR4500 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. Five months later, on 11 July 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 78 days, and was sentenced to a $530 forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement for two months and a suspended bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...