Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01048-10
Original file (01048-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

REC
Docket No: 01048-10
15 October 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 14 October 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 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 10
June 1977, at age 17. On 3 March 1978, you commenced a period of
unauthorized absence (UA) for six days. Your chain of command,
decided not to punish you for this misconduct. On 7 April 1978,
a mental health evaluation was conducted, you were diagnosed with
an immature personality disorder, and recommended for discharge.
However, at completion of your evaluation, you began a period of
UA lasting 442 days. Upon your return, you submitted a written
request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for a period of UA totaling over 14
months. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you
conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your
rights, and were warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. On 9 November 1979, your request for
discharge was denied. On 19 December 1979, you were convicted by
a special court-martial (SPCM) of being in an unauthorized
absence (UA) status on two occasions totaling 448 days. You were
sentenced to forfeitures of $885, reduction in pay grade and
confinement at hard labor for 60 days. However, the same day of
af

your SPCM, you commenced a third period of UA lasting 48 days.
On 9 January 1980, your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable

conditions by reason of misconduct. The discharge authority
directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct. On 22 February 1980, you were so discharged. At

that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct,
and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your lengthy periods of UA.
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,

\ pees
ie | P
Executive D °

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02544-09

    Original file (02544-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of NUP, conviction by SPCM for periods of UA totaling over six months, and the fact that you were given a opportunity to earn a better characterization of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05544-09

    Original file (05544-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 27 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | CY2009 | 03059-09

    Original file (03059-09.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. Your request for discharge was granted and you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of service on 2 October 1981. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06643-10

    Original file (06643-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. On 2 February 1984, you were discharged and received an OTH characterization of service by reason of your misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02317-09

    Original file (02317-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. You served without disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02430-09

    Original file (02430-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navel Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ’ application .on 12 January 2010. On 22 January 1981, your commanding officer forwarded your case to the discharge authority recommending an other than honorable discharge. 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 | 05935-09

    Original file (05935-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2010. 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 | 04433-10

    Original file (04433-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. You apparently submitted a request for a good of the service discharge to avoid trial by court-martial for your periods of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07171-10

    Original file (07171-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Between 14 March and 4 June 1978, you commenced three periods of UA, the first period lasting six days, the second period lasting 27 days, and the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07820-06

    Original file (07820-06.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 18 August 1976 at age 18. During this period of UA, you were convicted by...