DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S$. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TLG
Docket No: 7574-14
22 July 2015
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. The application was filed in
a timely manner.
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
10 July 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
21 April 1993. You served for about two years without
disciplinary incident. During the period from 27 April to
8 June 1995, you received two received nonjudicial punishments
(NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty, making a
false official statement, and failure to go to your appointed
place of duty.
On 13 October 1995, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA)
Status for a period of 85 days. As a result, it appears that
you requested discharge for the good of the service to avoid
trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of UA.
Regulations required that before making such a request, an
individual had to be advised by military counsel concerning the
consequences of such a request. Since the record shows that you
were discharged by reason of good of the service to avoid trial
on 31 January 1996, the Board presumed that the foregoing
occurred’ in your case. Because you requested discharge in lieu
of trial, you avoided the possibility of a punitive discharge
and confinement at hard labor.
The Board, in its review of your record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion that you
were mentally, physically and sexually abused. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
relief in your case given the severity of your misconduct and
lengthy period of UA which resulted in NUP and presumably your
separation from the Navy. The Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was
approved since, by this action, you escaped the possibility of
confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. The Board
further 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. Finally, there is no
evidence in the records, and you submitted none, to support your
assertion of being mentally, physically, or sexually abused
while serving in the Navy. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5393 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. During the period from 27 August 1992 to 24 March 1993, you were again UA on seven occasions for 35 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5393 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. During the period from 27 August 1992 to 24 March 1993, you were again UA on seven occasions for 35 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2651-13
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval | Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. relief in your case because of the seriousness of your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA which resulted in your request for discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3946 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 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 of this action, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6380 14
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. Although the discharge documentation is not in your record, it appears that you requested...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6229 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of the seriousness of your misconduct,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3834 14
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 | CY2014 | NR5411 14
a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. Nevertheless, the board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant an upgrade of your discharge because of your lengthy period of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2473 14
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. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 27 March 1996, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5235 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. The Board further concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when your request.