DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 01618-09
4 November 2009
‘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 4 November 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 on 16 August 1976, and served without
disciplinary incident until 23 April 1977, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an unauthorized absence (UA).
Shortly thereafter, you received the following disciplinary
“actions: on 27 June 1977, you received NUP for provoking speech
and gestures and assault; on 3 August 1977, you received NJP for
UA and missing ship’s movement; and on 10 January 1978, you were
convicted at a special court-martial for UA in excess of 45 days.
In addition, you were in a UA status from 21 March 1979 to 28
November 1983, 6 February to 30 April 1984, and 10 May 1984 to 25
March 1985. However, you requested through counsel, to be
separated to escape a trial by court-martial. Therefore, on 24.
May 1985, you were separated with an other than honorable
discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code, in lieu of a 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 and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and belief that enough time has elapsed to warrant
upgrading your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of the seriousness of your misconduct.
Further, there is no provision in the law or regulations that
allows for recharacterization of service due solely to the
passage of time. Furthermore, the Board believed that
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. It was
clear to the Board 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.
S \
W. Dees PFET HRER
Executive Direst
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10616-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 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 | 06460-07
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. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00536-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 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 | CY2011 | 03851-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 01844-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 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 | CY2010 | 01915-10
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your four NUP’s, UA's totaling over six months, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04720-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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. On 8 February 1984 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00234-11
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08188-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 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...