Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03505-11
Original file (03505-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

SJN
Docket No: 03505-11
1 February 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.31 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 a period of active duty on

6 December 1972. The Board found that although your record is
incomplete, it appears you received two nonjudicial punishments
(NJP's) for one unknown offense, disobedience, and two periods
of unauthorized absence (UA). Based on the information .
currently contained in your record it appears that you submitted
a written request for a good of the service discharge in order’
to avoid trial by court-martial for an unknown offense. 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. Your request for discharge was
granted and on 17 July 1974, you received an other than
honerable discharge for the good of the service 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, record
of service, events you state that resulted in your discharge,
and contention that you requested and were granted an “early
out” by your commanding officer. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your
misconduct that resulted in two NJP’s, charges being preferred
to a court-martial, 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. Further, the Board also noted

that you were fortunate’ to receive a general discharge since a
discharge under other than honorable conditions is often
directed when an individual submits a request for a good of the
service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial.
Finally, concerning your contention, there is no evidence in the
record to support it, and you submitted no such evidence.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panei 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.
Consequentiy, 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,

\s eK PPERF
Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00263-12

    Original file (00263-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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 | CY2012 | 01351 12

    Original file (01351 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 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. 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 | CY2012 | 01120 12

    Original file (01120 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 December 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 15 December 1995, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00152-12

    Original file (00152-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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 | CY2011 | 06168-11

    Original file (06168-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 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 | CY2006 | 07612-06

    Original file (07612-06.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Navy on 23 May 1980 at age 19. As a result of this action, you were spared the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00163-12

    Original file (00163-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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. Your record is incomplete; however, apparently you submitted a request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02723-11

    Original file (02723-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00752-12

    Original file (00752-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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. In this regard, on 21 July 1976, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4402 13

    Original file (NR4402 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2014. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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...