Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02024-08
Original file (02024-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 2024-08
7 January 2009

 

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 January 2009. 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 4 February 1987 at age 18 and
began a period of active duty on 27 July 1987. You served
without disciplinary incident until 28 April 1988, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a four day period of
unauthorized absence (UA). On 1 June 1988 you began another
period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended
by civil authorities on 22 December 1988. During this period of
UA you were also declared a deserter.

On 7 February 1989 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 which totalled 205 days. Prior to
submitting this request, you conferred with a qualified military
lawyer at which time you were advised of your rights and warned
of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a

discharge. Subsequently, your request was granted and your
commanding officer was directed to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of the good of the service. 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. On 16 February 1989 you
were issued an other than honorable discharge.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and desire to upgrade your
discharge so that you may pursue other career options and obtain
better employment. Nevertheless, the Board found the evidence
and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial for
your lengthy period of UA. Further, the Board believed that
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. Finally,
the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain
with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted
and you 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, re
W. DEAN 'P R
Executive eytor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06467-08

    Original file (06467-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board: consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s 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 served without disciplinary incident until 15 July 1989, when you received...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09505-06

    Original file (09505-06.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 7 October 1987 at age 22. The Board also concluded that you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02301-09

    Original file (02301-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 | 12075-09

    Original file (12075-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. 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 13 December 1989, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07480-09

    Original file (07480-09.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 June 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your daughter’s 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13211-09

    Original file (13211-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. 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 August 1989 you began a 119 day period of UA from your unit until you were apprehended on 20 December 1989.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00821-10

    Original file (00821-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2010. 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 | CY2014 | NR676 14

    Original file (NR676 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive gession, congidered your application on 5 November 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. consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11079-09

    Original file (11079-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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 | CY2008 | 09615-08

    Original file (09615-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2009. Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 January 1990, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service 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.