Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5564 14
Original file (NR5564 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 ©

 

BUG
Docket No: 5564-14
18 September 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 17 September 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and entered a period of active duty on
25 September 1974. You received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on
Lwo occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty
(eight instances}, and absence from your appointed place of duty
(two. instances). 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 day period of
unauthorized absence (UA). Prior to submitting this request,
you consulted with qualified military counsel and acknowledged
the adverse consequences of receiving such a discharge. The
separation authority approved your request for a discharge under
OTH conditions. On 23 April 1976, you were separated with a
discharge under OTH conditions for the good of the service to
avoid 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 entire record, carefully
considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as your
pouth, medical issues, and current desire to upgrade your
discharge to receive, veterans’ benefits. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to

arrant recharacterization of your discharge due to your two
NJP’s, period of UA that lasted five months, and request for
discharge. Furthermore, the Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to
pvoid trial by court-martial was approved. _It was also clear to
tthe Board 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. The Board was unable to find
that the Navy failed to provide you with effective leadership.
Finally, you are advised that no discharge is automatically
upgraded due merely to post service good conduct or the passage
of time. In view of the above, 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,

   

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Copy to:

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4315 13

    Original file (NR4315 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 2 April 2014. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 20 February 1973, you made a written request for discharge for the good of service to avoid trial by court-martial for failure to go to your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3342-13

    Original file (NR3342-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1980, you made a written request for an other _ than honorable (OTH) discharge to-avoid trial by court-martial for three instances of UA from your unit for a period totaling 30 days, failure to go to you appointed place of duty, . ‘The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as recharacterization of your. when your request for.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR0221-13

    Original file (NR0221-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 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. Based on the information currently contained in your record it appears that you submitted a written request for an other than honorable - (OTH)...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8164 13

    Original file (NR8164 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 4 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04820-11

    Original file (04820-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03584-09

    Original file (03584-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. On 22 November 1968, you received NUP for UA from you appointed place of duty. On 28 May 1970 you were 8O discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04651-10

    Original file (04651-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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 | NR3207-13

    Original file (NR3207-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction: of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2014. discharge. of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5894 13

    Original file (NR5894 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 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 | NR955 13

    Original file (NR955 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 16 October 2013. 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 an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for...