Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08603-06
Original file (08603-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 8603-06

17 July 2007

 

Dear SR meics

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 17 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 23 April 1984 at age 17 and
served without disciplinary incident until 14 January 1986, when
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful
possession of marijuana and were awarded reduction to paygrade

E-2 and a $500 forfeiture of pay.

On 13 January 1987, you received NUP for a two day period of
unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded a $180 forfeiture of

pay and restriction and extra duty for 14 days.

Your record contains two drug and alcohol reports dated 23
January and 6 February 1987. Both reports reflect that during
the period from 29 December 1986 to 22 January 1987 your urine
tested positive on two occasions for marijuana. As a result, on
15 April 1987, you submitted a written request for an other than
honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for
two specifications of wrongful possession and use of marijuana.
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 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. As a result, 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 assertion that you are a veteran in name only,
and are ineligible for benefits. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive drug related misconduct, and 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,

\Ddwe.

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di xr

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 11283-11

    Original file (11283-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | CY2002 | 05233-01

    Original file (05233-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10053-06

    Original file (10053-06.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. 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...

  • 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 | CY2013 | NR5286 13

    Original file (NR5286 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 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient Co establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07498-08

    Original file (07498-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2009. It also considered your assertion that you were told that you were being discharged under an “early-out” program and that your discharge would be automatically upgraded six months after your separation from the Marine Corps. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05254-10

    Original file (05254-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Or your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policiés: After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03787-01

    Original file (03787-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thereafter, the discharge authority approved the request and directed an undesirable discharge and you were so discharged on 26 February 1970. Board concluded that the foregoing factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NJPs, convictions by a summary and a special court-martial, and the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for a 31-day period of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02996-01

    Original file (02996-01.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 4 April 1983 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for five periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 17 days and two periods of Your record shows absence from your appointed place of duty. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03025-10

    Original file (03025-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 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 policise. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...