Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03606-12
Original file (03606-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TUR
Docket No: 3606-12
21 February 2013

 

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 20 February 2013. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 10 July 1973 at age 18 and
served for about six months without disciplinary incident.
However, during the period from 5 February to 10 July 1974, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions for
failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a two day
period of unauthorized absence (UA); were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) of failure to obey a lawful order and by
Civil authorities of possession of cannabis/tetra-hydro
cannabinol.

On 16 July 1974 you submitted a written request for an other than
honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for
wrongful possession of marijuana. Prior to submitting this
request you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which
time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable
adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. On 25 July
1974 your request was granted and the commanding officer was
directed to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason
of the good of the service. 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.
On 6 August 1974 you were issued an other than honorable
discharge.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge, and assertion that
your discharge was to be automatically upgraded. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive misconduct which included drug abuse and
resulted in two NUPs, convictions by military and civilian
authorities, and your 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.
Further, 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. Finally, no discharge is automatically upgraded due
solely to an individual's good post service conduct or the
passage of time. Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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,

we RL PF
Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04875 12

    Original file (04875 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 March 2013. 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 11 September 1974, you submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the 449 days of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08439-10

    Original file (08439-10.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. On 7 May 1976, you were separated with an under conditions OTH discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR955 13

    Original file (NR955 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 16 October 2013. 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 then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03027-10

    Original file (03027-10.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. AS & result, on 19 March 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court- martial for the three foregoing periods of UA totalling 376 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00309-11

    Original file (00309-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 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 | CY2012 | 05232-12

    Original file (05232-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2013 2013. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a 63...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08308-10

    Original file (08308-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03334-07

    Original file (03334-07.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 15 November 1972 at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09625-10

    Original file (09625-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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. 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 | CY2001 | 04851-01

    Original file (04851-01.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 December 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing two periods of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...