PEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24890
SIN
Docket No: 7833-13
10 July 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 8 July 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
28 September 1989. The Board found that you served without
incident for over three years until 9 July 1994, when you began a
period of unauthorized absence (UA) that lasted 628 days, ending
on 22 March 1996,- Although your record does not contain any of
the documentation related to your discharge, based on your
Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form
214), it appears you submitted a written request for an other
than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-
martial for a period of UA lasting over 20 months. 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 19 April .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 record of
service and desire to upgrade your discharge for veterans’
benefits. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient .to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your misconduct that resulted in charges being preferred to
* aveourt-martial for a very lengthy period of UA, 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.
With regards to receiving any benefits from the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA), the Board found that you reenlisted on
9 June 1993, after serving over three years of prior honorable
service, and believed that you may be eligible for veterans’
benefits that accrued during your first period of service.
Whether or not you are eligible for benefits based on either
period of service is a matter under the cognizance of the DVA.
If you have been denied benefits, you should appeal that denial
under procedures established by the DVA.
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
.@xistence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
LAD Aa
ROBERT D. ALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3686 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. On 20 June 1977 a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board {NDRB}, convened under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions. the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5894 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 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. From 22 July 1969 through 16 September 1970, you were UA from your unit on five occasions totaling a period of 320 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2533-13
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 | NR6687 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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 | CY2014 | NR4966 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09498-09
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. The Board believes that you may be eligible for veterans’ benefits which accrued during your prior period of honorable service. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2746-13
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 | CY2009 | 04252-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 14 April 1980, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5678 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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 | CY2009 | 08933-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. You submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods of UA totaling 173 days. 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.