Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02176-08
Original file (02176-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SMS
Docket No: 2176-08
30 October 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 29 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.

On 30 May 1972, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with
parental consent. On 15 November 1972, you had nonjudicial
punishment for a two day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
During the period 16 May to 2 July 1973, you were in a UA
status on three occasions totaling about 43 days. On

10 August 1973, you were convicted by a special court-martial
of the three UA's that totaled 43 days, two instances of
missing movement of your ship, and disobedience of a lawful
order. During the period 21 November 1973 to 24 March 1974,
you were in a UA status on three occasions totaling about 115
days. You subsequently requested an undesirable discharge (UD)
for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for
the three periods of UA totaling 115 days. At that time, you
consulted with counsel and acknowledged the consequences of
receiving such a discharge. On 26 April 1974, the separation
authority approved your request for a UD. On 2 May 1974, 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 and
desire for a better discharge. The Board also considered your
contention that you contracted hepatitis C while in the Navy.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due
to the seriousness of your misconduct, specifically, more than
five months of total UA. Further, there is no evidence in the
record to support your contention. 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,

\s

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05595-07

    Original file (05595-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 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 | CY2006 | 08965-06

    Original file (08965-06.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.On 24 January 1972 you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. Furthermore, the Board believed that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08125-01

    Original file (08125-01.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 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 April 1973 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and a five day period of UA. November 1976, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00847-05

    Original file (00847-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2005. 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 | CY2008 | 04636-08

    Original file (04636-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04345-08

    Original file (04345-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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. On 11 February 1974, you requested an UD for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA that totaled 141 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05238-08

    Original file (05238-08.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04511-08

    Original file (04511-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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. On 12 May 1976, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00503-11

    Original file (00503-11.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. As a result, on 26 June 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods of UA totalling 144 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04729-00

    Original file (04729-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. On 30 May The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, and...