Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08138-07
Original file (08138-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 8138-07
8 October 2008

 

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 7 October 2008. 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 on 9 January 1989 at age 17 and served
without disciplinary incident until 18 October 1989, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty and dereliction of duty. The punishment
imposed was restriction for 30 days, a $391.50 forfeiture of pay,
and reduction to paygrade E-1, which was suspended for six
months.

On 14 March 1990 you received NUP for absence from your appointed
place of duty and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 45
days and forfeiture of half your pay. The suspended reduction to
paygrade E-1 was also vacated at that time. On 1 October 1990
you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from
your appointed place of duty and uttering a worthless check. You
were sentenced to confinement for 25 days and a $250 forfeiture
of pay, which was suspended for six months.
On 11 April 1991 you submitted a written request for an other
than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, two
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order by allowing a
female civilian to live in the barracks, being out of uniform,
two specifications of wrongful possession of dangerous weapons,
specifically, a machete and a knife with a six inch blade, and
two specifications of uttering worthless checks totalling $58.24.
Prior to submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified
military lawyer at which time you were advised of your rights and
warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a
discharge. On 29 April 1991 your request was granted and your
commanding officer was directed to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of the good of the service. As a
result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-
martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
discharge and confinement at hard labor. On 30 April 1991 you
were issued an other than honorable discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and assertion that your
punishment was too harsh. It also considered your assertion that
the mistakes you made while serving in the Navy should not hold
you back for the rest of your life. Nevertheless, the Board
found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the
seriousness of your frequent and repetitive misconduct and your
request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial for these
offenses. Further, the Board believed that considerable clemency
was extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid
trial by court-martial was approved. Finally, the Board
concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the
Navy when your request for discharge was granted and you should
not be permitted to change it now. 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,

VA \

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03443-10

    Original file (03443-10.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 February 2011. 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 | CY2006 | 11189-06

    Original file (11189-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 20 April 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. On 11 March...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06392-07

    Original file (06392-07.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 2008. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07972-07

    Original file (07972-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2006 | 02518-06

    Original file (02518-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Marine Corps on 3 May 1983 at age 24 and served without disciplinary incident for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02791-06

    Original file (02791-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on XXXXX - . 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 Bo rd found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07680-02

    Original file (07680-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07698-07

    Original file (07698-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 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 | CY2014 | NR5085 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5085 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    14-528C, a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sittina in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2014. You were sentenced to confinement, a reduction in paygrade, a forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD) You received the BCD on 3 March 1992, after appellate review was completed Ce eae eV The Secretary of Defense memorandum of September 3, 2014, “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10956-02

    Original file (10956-02.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 October 2003. 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. However, on 18 December 1986, this suspended sentence was vacated due to your continued misconduct, specifically, a four day period of UA.