Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11184-10
Original file (11184-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BAN
Docket No: 11184-10
19 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 14 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 29 April 1969, and served without
disciplinary incident until 29 December 1970, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for removal of government property.
Shortly thereafter, on 7 January 1971, you received another NUP
for two specifications of unauthorized absence (UA).
Furthermore, you were pending a court-martial for a UA of six
months. However, you requested through counsel, to be separated
to escape a trial by court-martial. Your request was approved
and on 23 August 1971, you were separated with an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment 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 and alcoholism. 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. DEAN PRE
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08223-10

    Original file (08223-10.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. On 24 August 1973, you requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 537 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06920-10

    Original file (06920-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 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 probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00038-11

    Original file (00038-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10982-10

    Original file (10982-10.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. 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. As a result, on 27 January 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06980-10

    Original file (06980-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 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 probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08631-10

    Original file (08631-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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 probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05736-11

    Original file (05736-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 November 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02643-11

    Original file (02643-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2007 | 09942-07

    Original file (09942-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04203-10

    Original file (04203-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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 a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for...