Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01915-10
Original file (01915-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
: 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 01915-10
18 November 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 17 November 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 3 November 1982, at age 18. On 10 January 1983, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a
lawful order. On 18 August 1983, you received NUP for being
absent from your appointed place of duty on two occasions, and
failure to obey a lawful order. On 2 September 1983, you
received NUP for breaking restriction. On 19 January 1984, you
received NUP for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for
three days. On 25 May 1984, you commenced a period of UA which
lasted 180 days. On 12 December 1984, you submitted a written
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for the period of UA. 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 27 December 1984,
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 four NUP’s, UA's totaling over
six months, and request for discharge. 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 Marine Corps when
“your request for discharge was granted and should not be
“permitted to change it now. Further, you are advised that there
is no provision in the law or Navy regulations that allows for
“recharacterization of your discharge automatically due solely to
the passage of time. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06732-09

    Original file (06732-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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. Shortly thereafter, you received the following disciplinary actions: on 15 October 1983, you received NIP for UA for three days; and on 21...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03787-09

    Original file (03787-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | 01780-09

    Original file (01780-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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 May 1984 you received your third NUP for a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction for 15 days and a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11275-09

    Original file (11275-09.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. 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 | 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 | CY1999 | 05041-09

    Original file (05041-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 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 7 June 1983 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01038-10

    Original file (01038-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08590-08

    Original file (08590-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval and health records, applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 3 August 1984, you were counseled regarding UA and disobeying lawful orders, and warned that further misconduct could result in disciplinary action or administrative separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05322-09

    Original file (05322-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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. 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 | 03155-09

    Original file (03155-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existende of...