DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 11145-10
28 July 2011
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 28 July 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 on 9 May 1990, and served without
disciplinary incident until you were declared a deserter from 1
September 1990 to 13 July 1991, approximately 10 months. You
requested through counsel, to be separated to escape a trial by
court-martial. Your request was approved and on 12 September
1991, you were separated with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge and an RE-4 reentry code, in lieu of a trial by court-
martial. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma
of 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct. 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.
Sincerely,
W. Wb. OPERREE
Executive Diréc
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02686-10
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. 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 ifijuetice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08026-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 27 November 1991, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01682-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | 11203-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 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. Therefore, you were recommended for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH} discharge due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12077-10
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 request was approved by the discharge authority, and you received a discharge under other than honorable conditions on 9 August 1993. 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 | 11812-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. You are advised that no discharge is automatically upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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 | CY2013 | NR3856-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2014. 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as -.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06063-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. As a result of the foregoing, on 16 February 1990, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05572-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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 or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probab¥e material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1805 14
BR three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2014. 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. as a result of the foregoing period of UA totalling 203.days, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order...