Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 13157 11
Original file (13157 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 10014

 

ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

BAN
Docket No: 13157-11
3 October 2012

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 29 August 2012. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed jin 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 entered active duty service in the Marine Corps on 15 January
1973, and served without disciplinary incident until 18 May 1973,
when you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for unauthorized
absence (UA), and sleeping on post. Shortly thereafter, you
received the following NJP’s: on 9 August 1973, for UA and
willful disobedience; on 13 December 1973, for failure to obey a
lawful order; on 17 January 1974, for UA; on 22 February 1974,
for failure to obey a lawful order; on 21 March 1974, for UA; on
22 July 1974, for failure to obey a lawful order; on 20 January
1975, for UA; and on 17 April 1975, for failure to obey a lawful
order. On 3 October 1974, you were convicted at a special court-
martial of UA. In addition, on 18 March 1975, you were convicted
at another SPCM of UA, failure to obey a lawful order; and
failure to obey a written order. Finally, you were pending
another SPCM for six specifications of UA, failure to obey a
lawful order; and assault. However, while you were awaiting
court-martial, you requested, through counsel, to be separated
with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service to
escape trial by court-martial. At that time, you acknowledged
the consequences of such a discharge. Your request was granted
and on 3 February 1976, you were separated with an OTH discharge
and an RE-4 reenlistment code, 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 his entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. However, the Board concluded that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of your serious misconduct and request for discharge.

The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you
when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial
was approved. The Board 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. 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 his 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 Mir

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09370-08

    Original file (09370-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting:in executive session, considered your — application on 13 August 2009. 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. entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02723-11

    Original file (02723-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04040-11

    Original file (04040-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. 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 | CY2009 | 06011-09

    Original file (06011-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 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 | CY2010 | 04063-10

    Original file (04063-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 07199-10

    Original file (07199-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 18 June 1974, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04820-11

    Original file (04820-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 | CY2012 | 00317-12

    Original file (00317-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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 24 September 1974 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of UA from your unit for a period of 111 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01922-10

    Original file (01922-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 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. 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 | 09068-10

    Original file (09068-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 7 November 1975, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service.