Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08417-06
Original file (08417-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 8417-06

13 July 2007

 

 
  

ae

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 July 2007. 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 October 1987 at age 18 and
served without disciplinary incident until 27 July 1988, when you
were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of dereliction of
duty, sleeping on post, and failure to go to your appointed place
of duty. You were sentenced to reduction to paygrade E-1,
confinement for 29 days, and a $446 forfeiture of pay. About a
month later, on 29 August 1988, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for wrongful possession of a live round of
ammunition. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra
duty for 14 days and a $140 forfeiture of pay.

On 12 December 1988 you submitted a written request for an other
than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial

for misconduct in a restricted area, specifically, wrongful
entry, wrongfully consuming alcohol, making a false official
statement by denying that.you bought alcohol for and contributed
to the delinquency of minors, disorderly conduct, discreditable
conduct, and providing alcohol to minors. Prior to submitting
this request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer,
were advised of your rights, and warned of the probable adverse
consequences of accepting such a discharge. Subsequently, your
request was granted and on 9 March 1989 you received an other
than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Asa
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, passage of time, post service conduct, and request to
upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of the seriousness of your misconduct which
resulted NUP, a court-martial conviction, and 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. 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,
W. DEAN P E
Executive tor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08603-06

    Original file (08603-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2007. On 1 May 1987 your request for discharge was granted, and on 11 May 1987 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 probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08038-10

    Original file (08038-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 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. On 16 January 1993, after appellate review, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03535-02

    Original file (03535-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, the Board concluded that the other than honorable discharge was appropriate given your request for discharge in lieu of trial for two instances of assault, breach of the peace, wrongful use of marijuana, believed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08607-06

    Original file (08607-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 17 May 1974 your request for discharge was granted, and on 3 July 1974 you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1420 13

    Original file (NR1420 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 ‘ro establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11790-10

    Original file (11790-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A teres member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 September 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10738-10

    Original file (10738-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 August 2011. On 26 August 1983, you received NUP for dereliction ef duty... On.11 January 1984, you received NJP for wrongful use of marijuana. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of because of your three NUP’s, conviction by one SPCM, and request for discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4650 13

    Original file (NR4650 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 7 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 28 August 1970, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00141-11

    Original file (00141-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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 given your two NUP’s, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08408-06

    Original file (08408-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 12 August 1994 your request was granted. 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.