DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 00667-11
27 October 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 26 October 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 June 1999, at the age of 19. On
28 October 1999, you commenced a period of unauthorized absence
(UA) that lasted 85 days. On 21 January 2000, you requested a
good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-
martial for the period 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 3 February 2000, you received an
other than honorable discharge (OTH) and a reentry code of RE-4
for the good of service to avoid 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.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant upgrading your reentry code because of your
UA totaling over two months, and request for discharge. 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.
The Board also noted that you are entitled to submit the attached
Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed
Forces of the United States (DD Form 293} to the Naval Council of
Personnel Review Boards, Attention: Naval Discharge Review Board
(NDRB), 720 Kennon Street, SE, Room 309, Washington Navy Yard,
Washington, DC 20375-5023, for consideration of an upgrade of
your discharge and a change in your characterization of service.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05754-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 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 | CY2007 | 05399-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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 8 May 2001 you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08460-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07011-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 2011. 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. You then requested a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court- martial for the period of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01220-00
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. were so discharged. 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 | CY2011 | 00678-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10911-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. 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 | CY1999 | 07422-98
imposed was confinement for 30 days. On 9 December 1975 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of UA. case the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and Accordingly, your application has been no change is warranted.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10187-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2010. 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 | CY2011 | 00207-11
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 29 October 1976, you submitted a request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct,...