DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 6460-07
13 May 2008
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 6 May 2008. 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 Reserve on 26 March 1982 at age
18. On 19 November 1982, prior to reporting for active duty, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for sleeping on post.
Shortly thereafter, on 24 December 1982, you began a period of
active duty.
On 9 February and again on 11 June 1984 you received NUP for
disobedience and absence from your appointed place of duty.
During the period from 16 June to 3 December 1984 you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status for 170 days, missed the
movement of your ship, and were declared a deserter. On 16
28 January 1985.
As a result of the foregoing, you submitted a written request for
an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by
court-martial for the two periods of UA totalling 182 days and
missing the movement of your ship. 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 19
February 1985 your request for discharge was granted, and on 21
February 1985 you received an other than honorable discharge in
lieu of trial by court-martial. Asa 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, the passage of time and your desire 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 repetitive periods of UA,
which also resulted in your request for discharge. The Board
believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your
request for discharge was approved. 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. Finally, there is no provision in
law or regulations that allows for an automatic discharge upgrade
or recharacterization of service after any. specific period of
time. 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,
\ Oo fo
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11653-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 01618-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 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 | CY2006 | 05034-06
OS A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 November 2006. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 05417-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC Docket No: 05417-09 27 October 2009 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, A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your - application on 7 October 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01226-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered ‘your application on 9 November 2010. On 4 November 1985, after appellate review, you were so discharged. 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 | CY2012 | 00286-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2012. 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 9 May 1986, you received NUP for being UA for one day.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00082-11
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 found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08348-10
A 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. “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 | 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00260-09
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 23 April 1986, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. 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.