DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JDR
Docket No: 7480-14
5 August 2015
Dear
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.
Although your application was not filed ina 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
30 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, began a period of active duty on
11 August 1976, and served without disciplinary incident for
about one year and four months. However, although the record is
not complete, it appears that you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) on 13 December 1977. On 24 April and
16 May 1978, you received NUP for leaving your appointed place
of duty and failure to go to your appointed place of duty. You
also received a formal counseling on 31 July 1978 for being a
discredit to the Naval service because of your disobedience,
being sloppy in appearance while in uniform, being extremely
caustic towards authority, for not supporting equal opportunity,
for frequent verbal or physical arguments, unauthorized absence,
and for using an intimidating personality against others. On
24 November 1978, you were convicted by general court-martial
(GCM) of carnal knowledge, committing sodomy with a child under
the age of 16 by force and without consent. You were sentenced
to confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeiture of
two-thirds pay for six months, and a reduction in paygrade to
E-1. While you were confined, you requested a good of the
service (GOS) discharge in lieu of trial by subsequent special
court-martial.
Subsequently, your request was granted and the commanding
officer was directed to issue an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge by reason of the GOS. As a result of this action, you
were spared the stigma of another court-martial conviction and
the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and further
confinement at hard labor. On 4 June 1979, you were issued an
OTH discharge.
The Board, in its. review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge.
The board also considered your assertion that you did not mature
until after leaving the Navy. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct which
resulted in three NJPs and your GCM conviction based on carnal
knowledge and forcible sodomy. With regard to your assertion,
the Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to
you when your request for discharge to avoid a subsequent 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 you should not be
permitted to change it now that you feel you have matured.
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 1s 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 | CY2009 | 02317-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. You served without disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR10758 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2015. 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. After applying these guidelines to the evidence in the case, the Board was not able to substantiate the existence of PTSD in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00784-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. 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 | CY2008 | 00215-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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. 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 | NR2223 14
*: three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2807-13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 $. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2014. Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in Support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2679-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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 | CY2008 | 00171-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05980-00
Dear This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United Board for Correction of Navy A three-member panel for the Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09236-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and assertions that your misconduct and discharge were the result of you being under the influence of alcohol, and that you were not offered treatment for your alcohol abuse. Consequently, when applying for a...