DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 06945-10
19 March 2011
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 16 March 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 on 30 January 1976, and served
without disciplinary incident until 18 November 1976, when you
received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence (UA).
Shortly thereafter, you received another NUP for dereliction of
duty. In addition, you were in a UA status for 88 days, from
which you surrendered to local military authorities. You were
pending a court-martial for your UA. However, you requested
through counsel, to be separated to escape a trial by court=
Martial. Your request was approved and on 1 July 1977, you were
separated with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge and an RE-
4 reenlistment code, in lieu of a trial by court-martial. Asa
result of this action, you were spared the stigma of court-
martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
discharge and confinement at hard labor.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your claim that you were young and immature. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your misconduct. Furthermore, the Board believed that
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. It was
clear to the Board 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. 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,
Executive Dije
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05197-10
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 changing the characterization of your service, given your two NJP’s and periods of UA totaling 100 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03844-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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 because of your one NUP,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11333-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
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 | CY2010 | 06948-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 04063-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11379-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 August 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 are advised that no discharge is automatically upgraded due merely to the passage of time or post service good conduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02011-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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 | CY2010 | 03857-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 26 January 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 because of your four NUPs,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00207-11
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. On 29 October 1976, you submitted a request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct,...