DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON 0020370-5100

			TJR
										Docket No: 567-07 
										7 November 2007

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 6 November 2007. 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 1 October 1986 after four years of prior honorable service. You continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 28 August 1987, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order and communicating a threat. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for 14 days and a $400 forfeiture of pay. About three months later, on 28 November 1987, you received NJP for larceny and were awarded a $950 forfeiture of pay and a suspended reduction in paygrade.

Your record contains an administrative remarks entry dated 19 April 1989 in which you were warned regarding your performance deficiencies. This entry states, in part, as follows:

(Warning due to) receiving six letters regarding personal checks cashed totalling $3,975 without sufficient funds; repayment through salary garnishment; forced from married housing because your wife did not move in; nonpayment of a personal loan -- indebtedness and martial problems have absorbed many man-hours and an undue administrative burden.
On 13 January 1990 you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of larceny of a bank card, wrongful appropriation of $250, and 16 attempts of wrongful appropriation of $3,690. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeiture of all allowances and pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). After the BCD was approved at all levels of review, on 21 February 1991 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 service, post service conduct, desire to upgrade your discharge, and the passage of time. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct. Finally, no discharge is automatically upgraded due solely to the passage of time or due to an individual’s good post service conduct. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

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,