Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10249-07
Original file (10249-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMW
Docket No: 10249-07
14 July 2008

 

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 9 July 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. ~

On 3 May 1978, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. On

30 June 1978, you were issued orders to report to your next
duty station. On 15 July 1978, you did not comply with the
orders and began an unauthorized absence (UA) that ended on

9 June 1979, a period of about 329 days. Based on the
information currently contained in the record, it appears that
you subsequently requested an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-
martial for the 329 day period of UA. At that time, you would
have consulted with counsel and acknowledged the consequences
of receiving such a discharge. Apparently, the separation
authority approved your request for an OTH discharge. On

20 August 1979, you were separated with an OTH discharge for
the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial. Asa
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.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth. The
Board also considered the character reference letters that you
provided. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge due to the seriousness of your lengthy absence.
Furthermore, the Board believed that considerable clemency was

extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid trial
by court-martial was approved. The Board also 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,

W. DEAN PFET
Executive Di r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05804-08

    Original file (05804-08.pdf) 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. On 1 February 1979, you were warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06128-08

    Original file (06128-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 10006-09

    Original file (10006-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali Material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 4 April 1979, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01837-08

    Original file (01837-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were subsequently assigned to an infantry unit at Camp Pendleton. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change it now. 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 | CY2007 | 07454-07

    Original file (07454-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00340-10

    Original file (00340-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 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. Your record is incomplete, but it appears that you requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07171-10

    Original file (07171-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 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. Between 14 March and 4 June 1978, you commenced three periods of UA, the first period lasting six days, the second period lasting 27 days, and the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8164 13

    Original file (NR8164 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2014. 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 | CY2010 | 08466-10

    Original file (08466-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07268-07

    Original file (07268-07.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.On 15 September 1977, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17. On 17 October 1982, you began another UA...