Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01050-11
Original file (01050-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SJN
Docket No: 01050+11
9 November 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 8 November 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 20 March 1984. The Board found that you received four
nonjudicial punishments (NUJP’s) for two instances of
disobedience, six instances of unauthorized absence (UA),
breaking restriction, and wrongful use of marijuana. On

24 October 1986, you submitted a written request for an other
than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for 28 days of UA, having an alcoholic beverage in the barracks,
dereliction of duty, two instances of uttering worthless checks,
ang three instances of breaking restriction. 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.
Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on
18 November 1986, 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, record of
service, post service accomplishments, and character letters.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your four NUJP’s 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. 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,

\hLea ithe.

W. DEAN PFEIFFE
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02100-09

    Original file (02100-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materiai 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 | CY2013 | NR8333 13

    Original file (NR8333 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2014. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07395-10

    Original file (07395-10.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 together with all the Board consisted of your application, 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 | CY2007 | 09851-07

    Original file (09851-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08418-09

    Original file (08418-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which recommended three to zero an other than honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10376-09

    Original file (10376-09.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. 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10982-10

    Original file (10982-10.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. 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. As a result, on 27 January 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09511-09

    Original file (09511-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 2010. 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 error...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00624 12

    Original file (00624 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 11 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. On 4 June 1970, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court- martial for two...

  • 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...