DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN
Docket No: 09672-08
24 August 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
navai 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 18 August 2009. 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 and began a period of active duty on
9 June 1978 at age 19. Based on the information currently
contained in your record it appears that during the period from
13 November 1979 to 27 August 1980, you had two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) that ended with your apprehension
totaling 271 days. Subsequently, you submitted a written request
for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by
court-martial for those periods of UA. Prior to submitting this
request for discharge, you conferred with a qualified military
lawyer, were advised of your rights, and warned of the probable
adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.
Your request for discharge was granted and on 12 July 2001, you
received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the
service in lieu of 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 application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your misconduct which led to charges
for periods of UA totaling over nine months. The Board believed
that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request
for discharge 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 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,
hd
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01305-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 8 December 2009. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08338-08
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. During the period from 30 June 1978 to 7 August 1980, you had six periods of UA totaling 587 days. 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 | CY2009 | 00716-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2009. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in a period of UA totaling over four years, and your request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03639-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 14 November 1979, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the scrvice in lieu...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08107-08
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 | 09632-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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 | CY2008 | 09635-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2009, Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04345-08
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 | 04910-08
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06128-08
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...