DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD
ARLINGTON, VA 22204
SUN
Docket No: 02212-11
10 January 2012
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 5 January
2012. 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 and began active duty on 28 June 1975. On
6 October 1976, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that
lasted 296 days and ended apprehension on 29 July 1977. It appears
that you submitted a written request for a good of the service
discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the above
period of UA. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you
would have conferred with a qualified military lawyer, been advised of
your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge.
It also appears that your request for discharge was granted since you
received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service
in lieu of trial by court-martial on 19 September 1977. 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, record of service,
circumstances leading to your discharge, and letter from your brother.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the lengthy pericd
of UA lasting over nine months, which only ended with your
apprehension, and your request for discharge to avoid trial. 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,
F
Executive D or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01331-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. 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. However, your request for discharge was denied on 12 January 1977.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05287 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 2012. 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 | CY2009 | 01298-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. , 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 of injustice. Your request for discharge was granted and on 19 December 1972, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06743-07
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 Marine Corps on 29 August 1972 at age 19. On 19 April 1974, you began another...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01305-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 8 December 2009. 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 | 00244-11
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. 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 | CY2011 | 05736-11
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 | CY2010 | 04970-10
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 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 | 07542-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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 | CY2006 | 07820-06
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 18 August 1976 at age 18. During this period of UA, you were convicted by...