DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 12920-09
1 September 2010
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 31 August 2010. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 6 October 1972. You received nonjudicial
punishment for an unauthorized absence (UA) of 11 days). 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 by court-martial for UA (two
specifications totaling 278 days). At that time, you consulted
with qualified military counsel and acknowledged the adverse
consequences of receiving such a discharge. The separation
authority approved your request for an OTH discharge. On 25
March 1975, you were separated with an OTH discharge 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 veterans’ benefits. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge due to your UA totaling
over nine months. Furthermore, the Board believed that
gronsiderable clemency was extended to you when your request Lor
ischarge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. It was
lso clear to the Board 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. In view
of the above, 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 offiezal
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 PF E
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00335-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was snsufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. 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 by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01854-10
A three-member panel Of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 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 ~olicues . After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12909-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 August 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 22 May 1973, you requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for UA (three...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07610-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2010. The Board found that you entered active duty in the Navy on 15 July 1986. 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 | 12688-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00340-10
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 | CY2009 | 09406-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 2010. On 1 March 1976, you requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a UA totaling 62 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 | CY2010 | 01867-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2010. You later requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a UA totaling 242 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 | 11060-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2010. The Board found that you entered active duty in the Navy on 26 July 1974 and were honorably discharged on 1 June 1978. You then requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for three periods of UA totaling 64 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09197-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...