Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10839-09
Original file (10839-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

REC
Docket No: 10839-09
22 July 2010

 

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 14 July 2010. 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 and began a period of active
duty on 14 August 1975, at age 17. On 19 April 1976, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for disobeying a general
order. On 14 October 1977, you were convicted by civilian court
for having possession of a controlled substance and narcotics.
You were sentenced to 14 days confinement, a fine of $150, and
two years probation. On 10 April 1978, you received NUP for two
instances of being absent from your appointed place of duty. On
27 April 1978, you received NJP for disobeying a lawful order.

On 7 June 1978, you commenced a period of unauthorized absence
(UA) which lasted until you returned on 9 February 1981, totaling
997 days. Subsequently, on 16 February 1981, you submitted a
written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to
avoid trial by court-martial for a period of UA totaling over 32
months. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you
conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your
rights, and were warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. Your request for discharge was
granted and on 10 April 1981, you received an other than
honorable discharge 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
three NUJP’s and a lengthy UA period. Furthermore, the Board
believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your
request for discharge 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 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,

ld Nene
Taeuber

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10

    Original file (05796-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02317-09

    Original file (02317-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. You served without disciplinary infraction until 5 March 1979, when you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that was not terminated...

  • 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 | CY1999 | 05544-09

    Original file (05544-09.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 April 2010. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 11640-09

    Original file (11640-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of three...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00141-11

    Original file (00141-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two NUP’s, a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07596-07

    Original file (07596-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04839-10

    Original file (04839-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10773-09

    Original file (10773-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted two to one in favor of an under other than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00595-11

    Original file (00595-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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...