DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 11021-07
21 August 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, gection 1552.
A three-member panel jof the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 August 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 appllication, together with all material
submitted in support |thereof, your naval record, and applicable
statutes, regulations|, and policies.
After careful and congpcientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
On 30 August 1974, yo enlisted in the Navy at age
23. During the perio@ 15 to 16 June 1975, you were in an
unauthorized absence {UA) status, but it appears that no
disciplinary action was taken. On 26 June 1975, you had
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for about a three hour period of
UA. On 23 September 4975, you began a UA that ended on
4 December 1975, when|lyou were apprehended by civilian
authorities on chargeg of public intoxication. You
subsequently requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the
good of the service tq avoid trial by court-martial for the 72
day period of UA. At |that time, you consulted with counsel and
acknowledged the consdquences of receiving such a éischarce.
On 10 February 1976, you had NUP for a brief instance of UA,
disrespect, failure tod obey a lawful order, and being
intoxicated while on duty. On 6 February 1976, the separation
authority approved your request for a UD. On 20 February 1976,
you were separated with a UD for the good of the service to
avoid trial by court-martial. 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.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth. The
Board also considered your contentions that hearing loss and an
abusive officer contributed to your misconduct. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the
seriousness of your repetitive misconduct. Regarding your
contentions, there is no evidence in the record to support
them. 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,
128 iy
ROBERT D. I~
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2487-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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 | CY2007 | 08797-07
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 11 March 1977 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for three periods of UA totalling 225 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05557-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2008. On 24 July 1975, the separation authority denied your request. 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 | 04738-07
On 24 February 1976 you submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the UA period. Your request for discharge was granted and on 11 March 1976 you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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 | CY2010 | 05198-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. You submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05287 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2012. 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 | CY2011 | 04352-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2012. 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 | CY2010 | 05693-10
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03345-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09060-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. 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...