DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BJG
Docket No: 4203-10
19 January 2011
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 19 January 2011. 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.
You entered active duty in the Navy on 1 April 1992. Your
record is incomplete, but it appears that you received
nonjudicial punishment for two periods of unauthorized absence
(UA) totaling 27 days. You began another period of UA on 28
August 1992 which did not end until you were apprehended by
civil authorities on 26 July 1994. You then requested a
discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the
good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the
period of UA totaling almost two years. 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 a discharge
under OTH conditions. On 29 August 1994, you were separated
with a discharge under OTH conditions 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
‘remorse. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge due to your UA totaling almost two years.
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 also 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. You are advised that no discharge
is upgraded due merely to post service good conduct or the
passage of time. 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 efficial
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,
\Den Stet
W. DEAN ‘PF
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07011-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2011. 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. You then requested a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court- martial for the period of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR624 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2013. 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. You then requested a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a 351 day...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03441-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 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 9 December 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation, but the separation action was subsequently suspended due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3207-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction: of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2014. discharge. of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08460-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02643-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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 then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for five...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11829-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10909-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a period of UA totaling 226 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 | 10343-10
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. Your record is incomplete, but you then requested a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for three periods of unauthorized absence totaling 215 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11881-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...