Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3366 14
Original file (NR3366 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
a on ht - _—

lit oe NR ROAR
(af Sees, A ee

    

 

TAL
Docket No: 33
24 November 2

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, United
States Code, section 1552.

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on

5 November 2014. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request. 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
injustace:.

You reenlisted in the Navy on 6 July 1984 after more than three
years of prior honorable service. You served without
disciplinary incident until 5 October 1988, when you were
convicted in civil court of driving under the influence and
speeding. You received nonjudicial punishment on 19 March 1993
and 6 January 1996, for larceny and writing checks without
sufficient funds.

Subsequently, you submitted a written request for an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-
martial. Prior to submitting this request you would have
conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you were
advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse
consequences of accepting such a discharge. On 4 October 1996,
ted with an ATT

your request was granted and you Wels separated
discharge. 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 entire record and app
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and your assertion that
your characterization of service was changed Lu honorable.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the
seriousness of your misconduct. The Board believed that
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. The
Board 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. Regarding your
assertion that your characterization of service was changed to
honorable, there is no record of such a change in your official
military personnel record. Accordingly, your application has

been denied.

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 within one year from the date of the Board's decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in your case. 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,

ROBERT J. O' NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6229 14

    Original file (NR6229 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 16 June 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01158-11

    Original file (01158-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 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. The record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09060-07

    Original file (09060-07.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 November 2008. 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 | 11342-07

    Original file (11342-07.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. On 25 June 1974 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02011-08

    Original file (02011-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2008. 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 | 08741-07

    Original file (08741-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. As a result, on 28 February 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05238-08

    Original file (05238-08.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 | CY2007 | 08138-07

    Original file (08138-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 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 | CY2008 | 09542-08

    Original file (09542-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s 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. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07465-07

    Original file (07465-07.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 Marine Corps on 9 April 1970 at age of 17 and served without disciplinary...