DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON pc 20370-5100. SYN
Docket No: 07013-08
§ June 2009
Dear iungiinr..
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 2 June 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 ail 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 insuificient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
15 June 1977. On 2 May 1978, you received nonjudicial punishment
(NIP) for housebreaking and two instances of larceny. You
received restriction, extra duty, and a suspended forfeiture of
pay.
On 27 September 1978, you submitted a written request for a good
of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for possession of marijuana, two periods of unauthorized absence
totaling 20 days, two instances of breaking restriction,
destruction of government ptoperty, disrespect, being drunk on
duty, leaving your place of duty without being property relieved,
absence from your appointed place of duty, assault, three
instanéés of disobedience, and escaping from” custody. 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.
Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 October 1978,
you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of
the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in NUP
and charges being preferred to a court-martial for the serious
offence of drug possession and other numerous disciplinary
infractions. 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 Navy 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
Executive
tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08338-08
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. During the period from 30 June 1978 to 7 August 1980, you had six periods of UA totaling 587 days. 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 | CY2011 | 01781-11
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 | CY2008 | 05980-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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. On 15 June 1978, you requested an OTH discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the 298 day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09204-06
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.On 29 September 1978 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19 and served without incident until 9...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10839-09
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. 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 10 April 1981, you received an other than honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05804-08
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. On 1 February 1979, you were warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02194-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2009. You received an OTH on 3 December 1980. 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 | 00062-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. On 2 October 1978, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06162-08
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. During the period 4 April to 10 August 1978, you were in a UA status, a period of about 128 days. On 15 August 1979, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent discreditable involvement.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08635-05
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 7 September 1976 at age 19. Your military record shows that you...