DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL RECORDS
2 N A V Y A N N E X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No:. 10961-02
15 October 2003
his is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of ~ i t l e 10, 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 7 October 2003. 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 Marine Corps on 12 May 1978 after two years
of prior honorable service in the Army. You continued to serve
without disciplinary incident until 17 October 1979 when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) fqr absence from your
appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was restriction
and extra duty for seven days and a $100 forfeiture of pay, half
of which was suspended for two months.
~uring the period from 19 June to 15 October 1981 you received
NJP on three occasions for three periods of unauthorized absence
(uA) totalling 11 days and wrongful appropriation of an
automobile valued at approximately $5,200.
On 13 January 1982 you received your fifth NJP for a five day
period of UA. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade
E-1, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, and a $250
forfeiture of pay, a portion of which was suspended for six
months.
On 6 March 1982 you began a period of UA that was not terminated
until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 30 ~ p r i l 1982.
On 8 ~ u l y 1982 you submitted a written request for an other than
honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for
the foregoing period of UA totalling 56 days. Prior to
submitting this request for discharge, you conferred with a
qualified military lawyer, were advised of your rights, and
warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a
discharge. On 27 July 1982 your request for discharge was
granted and on 13 August 1982 you received an other than
honorable discharge in lieu of 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 and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and your assertion that your misconduct
was the result of being in a unit of mostly officers who consumed
alcohol on a daily basis. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your frequent misconduct, which
resulted in five NJPs and your lengthy period of UA which
resulted in your request for discharge. 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 also concluded that you received the
benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request
for discharge was granted and should not be permitted to change
it now. Further, the Board noted that there is no evidence in
the record, and you submitted none, to support your contention.
Accordingly, 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09384-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. You received NJP on 22 February 1992 for a 17 period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 4 5 days and a $550 forfeiture of pay. However, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07707-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2002. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06601-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. 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 | CY2001 | 08556-01
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 20 October 1960 you submitted a written request for immediate execution of the BCD. 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 | CY2002 | 10974-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2003. On 24 June 1968 you were convicted by SCM of a 15 day period of UA and sentenced to a $65 forfeiture of pay and confinement at hard labor for 30 days. 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 | CY1999 | 01099-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10975-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2 0 0 3 . 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. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and on 26 June 1984 you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07460-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 1999. 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. Given all the circumstances of your case the.Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10943-02
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. Because you requested discharge in lieu of trial, you received the benefit of your bargain when you were discharged and not tried by court-martial, and on 25 August 1978 you received an other than honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03835-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. On 16 November 1982 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a 15 day period of UA, absence from your appointed place paygrade E-l, a $500 of duty,...