Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04839-10
Original file (04839-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SIN
Docket No: 04839-10
28 February 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 23 February 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 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

24 July 1978. The Board found that on 14 March 1979, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for 10 days of unauthorized
absence (UA). On 17 October 1979, you began a period of UA that
lasted for 664 days, ending in your apprehension on 1 August
1981. You submitted a written request for a good of the service
discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for that 664
day period of UA and missing movement. 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
29 December 1981, you received a second NJP for 20 days of UA.
Your request for discharge was granted and on 2 April 1982, 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, record of
service, and character letters. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct
that resulted in two NUP’s for UA, charges being preferred to a
court-martial for a period of UA totaling over 22 months, and
request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended fo you when your request for discharge was
approved. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit
of your bargain with thf Navy when your request for discharge was
granted and should not be permitted to change it now.
Accordingly, your appication has been denied. The names and
votes of the members Sf 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,

W. DEAN ( F
Executive o x

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00619-09

    Original file (00619-09.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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in periods of UA totaling over...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00595-11

    Original file (00595-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 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. 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 | CY2010 | 08592-10

    Original file (08592-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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. Based on the information currently contained in your record it appears that you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04511-08

    Original file (04511-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 12 May 1976, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04827-10

    Original file (04827-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SON Docket No: 04827-10 28 February 2011 States Code, section 1552. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval © Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2011. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10056-07

    Original file (10056-07.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.On 30 August 1979, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18. On 15 December 1981, you requested an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02170-09

    Original file (02170-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 16 December 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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05822-11

    Original file (05822-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 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. 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 | CY2001 | 00433-01

    Original file (00433-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2001. 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. discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07454-07

    Original file (07454-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2008. 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...