Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02301-09
Original file (02301-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ON

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TIR
Docket No: 2301-09
17 February 2010

 

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 3 February 2010. 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 1 December 1986 at age 19 and
began a period of active duty on 27 January 1987. You served
without disciplinary incident until 9 July 1987, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a one day period of
unauthorized absence (UA). The punishment imposed was a $150
forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 14 days.
About a month later, on 17 August 1987, you received NJP for
absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded
restriction and extra duty 14 days.

On 10 December 1988 you submitted a written request for an other
than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for wrongful use of cocaine, amphetamine, and methamphetamine.
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 the
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 14 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 and desire to upgrade your discharge. It also
considered your assertion that you incurred a back injury while
serving on active duty for which you would like to seek monetary
benefits. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in
two NUPs and your request for discharge for drug abuse. The
Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you
when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial
was approved. Further, 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. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and
you submitted none, to support your assertion. 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,

\s .
W. DEAN
Executive Dil r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08603-06

    Original file (08603-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2007. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 06276-09

    Original file (06276-09.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 June 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. During the period from 1 June to 13 December 1976 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on two occasions.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10640-09

    Original file (10640-09.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 10 February 1975 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods of UA totalling 452 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03706-07

    Original file (03706-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2008. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted, and on 11 May 1973 you received an undesirable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct and lengthy periods of UA, which also resulted in your request for discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11342-07

    Original file (11342-07.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. On 25 June 1974 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06250-09

    Original file (06250-09.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 June 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. As a result, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 10616-09

    Original file (10616-09.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 July 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04720-09

    Original file (04720-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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 8 February 1984 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08138-07

    Original file (08138-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2008. 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...