DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
“}BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20376-5100 CRS
Docket No: 12350-10
: 18 August 2011
: r
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 17 August 2011. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviéwed 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.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 26 February
1974. On 11 December 1975 you received nonjudicial punishment
for an unauthorized absence of 15 days.
On 13 December 1976 you submitted a written request for discharge
for the good of the, service in lieu of trial by court-martial for
six periods of unauthorized absence totaling 204 days. Prior to
submitting this request you conferred with a qualified military
lawyer who advised you of your rights and warned of the probable
adverse: consequences of receiving an undesirable discharge on 21
“December, 1976.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and personal
problems. It found-those factors insufficient to warrant
corrective action in your case given your numerous disciplinary
offenses for which you requested separation. In addition, the
Board believes that considerable clemency was extended to you
when your request for discharge was approved since, by that
N
; 7
action, you avoided the possibility of a Federal conviction,
confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. Further, the
Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain
when your request for discharge was granted. 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 igs 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,
\y Woah)
W. DEAN PFEIFRFE
Executive Dikec
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05197-10
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your service, given your two NJP’s and periods of UA totaling 100 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12502-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 17 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05198-10
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. You submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05406-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in 60 days of UA and your inability to adapt to military service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05693-10
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11333-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11618-10
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 injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03844-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your one NUP,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00670-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07094-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. You received the undesirable discharge on court- However, the Board found that these factors were not such as your youth and Further, the Board concluded that...