DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 3946-14
15 May 2015
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
20 April 2015. 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
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 16
June 1982. During the period from 13 May 1983 to 19 April 1985,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on four occasions for
disobedience, making a false official statement, uttering seven
bad checks, failure to go to your appointed place of duty,
sleeping: on post, being drunk on duty, and larceny.
On 29 April 1986, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA)
that was not terminated until 2 May 1989. During this period you
were declared a deserter, however, only the offense of UA was
referred for trial.
As a. result of this action, you submitted a written request for
an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by
court-martial for the foregoing 1,098 day period of UA. Prior to
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. Subsequently, your request was granted and the
commanding officer was directed to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of the good of the service. Asa
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 9 June 1989, you
were issued an other than honorable discharge.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion that your
period of UA was due to issues with your first sergeant and being
abused. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the
seriousness of your misconduct and lengthy period of UA, which
resulted in four NJPs and your 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 you should not be permitted to change
it now. Finally, the Board determine that your assertion was not
enough to outweigh the significant misconduct you committed while
serving on active duty. 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 or other matter not previously considered by the Board
within one year from the date of the Board’s decision. 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.
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4335 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 April 2015. The Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change it now. 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 | NR12509 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, - Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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. Asa result, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07091-07
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late son’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.Your late son enlisted in the Navy on 24 February 1986 at the age of 18. His record shows...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7574 14_Redacted
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S$. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07480-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR8553 14
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7018S. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2015. 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 | NR2340 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. As a result, on 2 February 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02024-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2009. 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 | CY2014 | NR8553 14_Redacted
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7011S. 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. On 18 June 1976, you werg igsued an other than honorable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07465-07
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...