Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2533-13
Original file (NR2533-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2496

SIN
Docket No: 02533-13
2 April 2014

 
 

 

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 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. 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 April 1994. The Board found that your record is incomplete.
Based on your Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active
Duty (DD Form 214), during the period from 16 March to 20 August
1996, you had two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling

217 days. It appears you submitted a written request for an

other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by
court-martial for 217 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.
Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on

25 October 1996, 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, record of
service, and post service medical issues. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the charges preferred
to a court-martial for periods of UA totaling over seven 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.

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,
Ree QOD, eo

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7833 13

    Original file (NR7833 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 8 July 2014. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 19 April .1996, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04276-10

    Original file (04276-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 | NR2746-13

    Original file (NR2746-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2014. 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 | 01327 12

    Original file (01327 12.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 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3834 14

    Original file (NR3834 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2015. 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 an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00703 12

    Original file (00703 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 24 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. 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 | NR5164 13

    Original file (NR5164 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 29 April 2014. 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. 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 | CY2001 | 01220-00

    Original file (01220-00.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. 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 | CY2014 | NR5564 14

    Original file (NR5564 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2014. 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 then requested a discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a 150...