Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6750 14_Redacted
Original file (NR6750 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

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

 

TAL
Docket No: 6750-14
8 July 2015

 

cea

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

17 June 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

4 September 1981. You served for 11 months without disciplinary
incident, but on 24 August 1982, you received nonjudicial
punishment for insubordinate conduct toward a noncommissioned
officer. On 17 January 1983, you were in an unauthorized
absence (UA) status from your unit until you were apprehended by
civil authorities on 1 June 1987, a period of four years and
four months.
Based on the information currently contained in your record, you
submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the
foregoing period of UA. 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. Your
request was granted and you were separated with an OTH
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. on

21 July 1987, you were discharged under OTH conditions.

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. 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.
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 | CY2010 | 12214-10

    Original file (12214-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August. Your request for discharge was granted and, on 21 January 1992, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NUP and SPCM for periods of UA, and last period of UA that lasted over four years.

  • 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01638-08

    Original file (01638-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. 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

    Original file (NR4966 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 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 | 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 | CY2014 | NR3594 14

    Original file (NR3594 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 >@ October 2014. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant te demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10710-10

    Original file (10710-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 10 August 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3834 14

    Original file (NR3834 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 25 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. You submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of UA.

  • 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 | CY2009 | 13211-09

    Original file (13211-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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. On 23 August 1989 you began a 119 day period of UA from your unit until you were apprehended on 20 December 1989.