Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06362-08
Original file (06362-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

TUIR
Docket No: 6362-08
7 May 2009

 

Dearyg

 

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 5 May 2009. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 10 January 1973 at age 17 and

served for nearly a year without disciplinary incident. However,
on 5 December 1973 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
a seven day period of unauthorized absence (UA). Shortly

thereafter, on 8 February 1974, you were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of a 31 day period of UA.

On 23 May 1974 you submitted a written request for an undesirable
discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for wrongful
possession of marijuana, three specifications of failure to obey
a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty,
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, five
specifications of disobedience, and communicating a threat.

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. On 12 June 1974 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. 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. On 19 June 1974 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, desire to upgrade your discharge, and previous
appeals to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the Board found
the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the
seriousness of your misconduct which included drug abuse and
resulted in NUP, SCM, and your request for discharge to avoid
trial by court-martial. 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.

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,

\ ea

W. DEAN PF R
Executive tor

No

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07199-10

    Original file (07199-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 18 June 1974, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08125-01

    Original file (08125-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 April 1973 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and a five day period of UA. November 1976, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order...

  • 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 | CY2011 | 00464-11

    Original file (00464-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application om 25 October 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 | CY2007 | 09060-07

    Original file (09060-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. 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 | CY2008 | 05027-08

    Original file (05027-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07236-09

    Original file (07236-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00752-12

    Original file (00752-12.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 October 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. In this regard, on 21 July 1976, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00317-12

    Original file (00317-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 24 September 1974 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 111 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07528-09

    Original file (07528-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reenlistment code or characterization of your discharge,...