Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3594 14
Original file (NR3594 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
TAL -
Docket No: 3594-14

6 November 2014

er

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

>@ October 2014. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request. Your aliegations 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
‘al submitted in support

your application, together with all materi
thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations,

and policies.

ration of the entire
pmitted was insufficient
1 error or

After careful and conscientious conside
record, the Board found the evidence Su
to establish the existence of probable materia
i injustice.

 

i You enlisted'in the: Navy and began:a period of active auty on
10 November 1986. You served for-six months without disciplinary
9 May to 12 June 1987, you

incident, but during the period frem 7
received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) on two occasions. Your

‘ offenses were unauthorized absence (UA), insubordinate conduct

i and failure to obey a lawful order. Vou submitted a written

i request [or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to
avoid trial py court-martial for two additional periods of UA
totaling over 40 days and.two instances of missing ship’s
movement. Prior tc submitting this request you 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. Your request was granted and the
separation authority airected- your OTH discharge. As 4 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. On 24 November 1987 you were

~@ischarged under OTH conditions .

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire Lo upgrade your discharge and assertion that because
you suffered from Pes Planus (flat feet) you should not have been
allowed to enlist in the Navy. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in two Nurs, periods of UA totaling over two months, and
request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to
avoid trial by court-martial was approved. Further, 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, the
Board noted that your misconduct outweighed the mitigation of
your Pes Planus condition. 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 im 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 te demonstrate the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

Sincerely

   
 
    

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Frecutive Director

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2013 | NR3579-13

    Original file (NR3579-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 19 February 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. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court- Martial for three...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6687 13

    Original file (NR6687 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 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR1420 13

    Original file (NR1420 13.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 ‘ro establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3342 14

    Original file (NR3342 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 5 November 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. after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08492-08

    Original file (08492-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval health record, 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 | CY2007 | 07867-07

    Original file (07867-07.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. Based on the information currently contained in the record, it appears that you subsequently requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA that totaled about 55 days and missing the movement of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05011-08

    Original file (05011-08.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07887-08

    Original file (07887-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2009. On 1 March 1988, you were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct, warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge, and informed where substance abuse assistance was available. On 13 June 1988, you requested an OTH discharge for the good of the service to...