DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
Docket No: 850-14
13 February 2015
This is in reference to your application for correction OF your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, Unite
States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 3 February 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 c idered by
the Board consisted of your application, together h all
material submitted in support thereof, your naval rd, and
ical tatutes, regulations, and policies.
onscientious i ntire
ound the evidence submitted was insufficient
scence of prob Sor Gi
farine Corps and a ive
You served for about ithout
ut on 14 January and again on 5 May 1977,
unishm
an
nt (NUP) for disobedience and
oO
On 30 April 1979, you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of a 406 day period of authorized absence (UA) and
sentenced, in part, to a bad conduct discharge (BCD), which was
suspended for a year. However, four months later, on 23 August
19)/ 9), rea eo another period of UA that was not terminated
until 17 July 1980. 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.
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 and post service conduct.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the
seriousness of your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA.
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.
Singerel
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
i ee ——E —
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2085 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015. However, two months later, on 26 August 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 60 day period of UA. 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 | CY2014 | NR0921 14
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. for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04128-12
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 February 1980 you were advised that administrative separation action had been initiated by reason of misconduct, but held in abeyance pending a medical evaluation for alcohol abuse. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $598 forfeiture of pay, and a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7235 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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. You were also convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of 284 days of UA and sentence to forfeitures of pay, confinement for 60 days, reduction to pay grade...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02544-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of NUP, conviction by SPCM for periods of UA totaling over six months, and the fact that you were given a opportunity to earn a better characterization 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 | CY2002 | 09384-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. You received NJP on 22 February 1992 for a 17 period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 4 5 days and a $550 forfeiture of pay. However, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7182 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 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 | NR5880 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2015. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your case. 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.