DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SIN
Docket No: 11384-10
28 July 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 July 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 16 March 1971. The Board found that you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for dereliction of duty. on
18 October 1976, you submitted a written request for a good of
the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for three periods of unauthorized absence (UA} totaling 923 days.
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. However, court-martial jurisdiction could not
completed your enlistment documents by failing to disclose your
prior criminal record. Further, at that time, you were on
probation by order of a juvenile court, no waiver was obtained
regarding your record, and your recruiter had retired and could
not be contacted. Subsequently, administrative discharge action
was initiated by reason of recruiter malfeasance. Your case was
forwarded recommending that you receive a general discharge. On
9 June 1978, the separation authority concurred and directed that
you be separated with a general discharge for time served. You
were so discharged on 21 June 1978.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your fraudulent enlistment, recruiter malfeasance, NJP,
very lengthy periods of UA, and the fact that, at that time, the
Marine Corps did not have court-martial jurisdiction over you.
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,
\oo6
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Darnegt
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11487-10
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. Bfter 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 | 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 | 00141-11
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 | CY2010 | 11270-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navai Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. As a result, on 9 April 1985, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07322-10
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. On 17 May 1978 you made a written request for discharge for the good of service to avoid court-martial for the foregoing periods of UA. *Further, the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and should...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6215 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2014. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11696-10
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. 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 | CY2011 | 00234-11
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10229-10
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. 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 25 February 1975 after nearly two years and eight months of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01837-08
You were subsequently assigned to an infantry unit at Camp Pendleton. The Board also 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. 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.