DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
REC
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5
100 Docket No: 03857-10
28 January 2011
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 26 January 2011. 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 6 May 1974, at age 18. On 22 May 1974, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disobeying a lawful order, and
being disrespectful. On 16 September 1974, you received NUP for
being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for five days. On
8 January 1975, you received NUP for being UA for 66 days. On
30 April 1975, you received NJP for being UA for eight days. On
19 May 1975, you commenced a period of UA for eight days. On
30 May 1975, you began a period of UA for 335 days. On 30 April
1976, you began a 27 day period of UA. Your chain of command
took no disciplinary action. On 1 May 1376, you submitted a
written request for an administrative discharge for the good of
service in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the latter
three periods of UA totaling 370 days. Prior to submitting this
request for discharge, you conferred with a qualified military
lawyer, and 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 7 June 1976, you
received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by
court-martial. As a result of that 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 NUPs, periods of UA
totaling over one year, and request for discharge in lieu of
trial by court-mantial. 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.
Tt 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,
>Re
Executive Dive Yr
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05198-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 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. You submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03345-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02408-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01331-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. However, your request for discharge was denied on 12 January 1977.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12405-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12122-10
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 given your two NUP’s, conviction by SPCM of a lengthy period of UA, and your request for discharge to avoid trial for a period of UA lasting over 15 months. Consequently, when applying...
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 | CY2011 | 05287 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11021-07
A three-member panel jof the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 2008. After careful and congpcientious 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 | 02983-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2010. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in periods of UA totaling over five months, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...