Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12214-10
Original file (12214-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN

Docket No: 12214-10
31 August 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 30 August. 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.

On 19 November 1985, you reenlisted in the Navy after seven years
of honorable service. The Board found that you were convicted by
special court-martial (SPCM) of three specifications of
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 154 days. You received a
reduction in paygrade, confinement, and a forfeiture of pay. On
16 January 1987, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a
period of UA. You were counseled that further misconduct could
result in administrative discharge action. On 25 January 1987,
you missed ship’s movement and began a period of UA that lasted
1,761 days, ending with your apprehension by civil authorities on
21 November 1991. Although your record is incomplete, it appears
that subsequently, you submitted a written request for an other
than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-
martial for the 1,761 days of UA. 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.

Your request for discharge was granted and, on 21 January 1992,
you received an OTH discharge 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, prior
honorable service, last period of service, post service
accomplishments, and character letters. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your NUP and SPCM for
periods of UA, and last period of UA that lasted over four years.
The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you
when your request for discharge was approved. The Board also
concluded 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. 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 PF
Executive D or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10654-10

    Original file (10654-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12122-10

    Original file (12122-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two NUP’s, conviction by SPCM of a lengthy period of UA, and your request for discharge to avoid trial for a period of UA lasting over 15 months. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12213-10

    Original file (12213-10.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 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. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 29 March 1990, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • 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 | CY2010 | 05832-10

    Original file (05832-10.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 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. 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 | 09011-10

    Original file (09011-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 28 January 1988, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07458-10

    Original file (07458-10.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. 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 | CY2013 | NR1420 13

    Original file (NR1420 13.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 ‘ro establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10768-10

    Original file (10768-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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 3 September 1985, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10710-10

    Original file (10710-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 10 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct...