Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00234-11
Original file (00234-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC

Docket No: 00234-11
27 October 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. ,

R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 October 2011. Your allegations of error anda
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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 24 November 1975, after
serving more than two years honorably. On 17 February 1977, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongfully
appropriating $359.42 of government funds. On 1 March 1977, you
received NOP for being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for
one day. On 16 dune 1977, you received NUP for signing a false
signature to an official document with intent to deceive. On 23
July 1977, you commenced two periods of UA that lasted 180 days.
On 1 March 1978, you submitted a request for a good of the
service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for
the periods 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 21 March 1978, you received an other
than honorable discharge (OTH) for the good of service to avoid
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 three NUP’s for misconduct,
lengthy periods of UA, 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,

\Sduna

W. DEAN
Executive rector

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2010 | 07322-10

    Original file (07322-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 07171-10

    Original file (07171-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Between 14 March and 4 June 1978, you commenced three periods of UA, the first period lasting six days, the second period lasting 27 days, and the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08742-07

    Original file (08742-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | CY2009 | 06473-09

    Original file (06473-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 June 2010. As a result, on 21 March 1978, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing three periods of UA totalling 31 days and desertion resulting from a 127 day period of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00670-11

    Original file (00670-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct, and request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08315-10

    Original file (08315-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 request for discharge was granted and on 6 September 1978, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01331-12

    Original file (01331-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 06774-10

    Original file (06774-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 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 12 August 1980, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01781-11

    Original file (01781-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...