Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05185 12
Original file (05185 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490

 

BAN

Docket No: 05185-12
28 March 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 March 2013. 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 had prior honorable service in the Marine Corps from 1976 to
1979. You reenlisted on 31 May 1979, and served without
disciplinary action until 23 April 1980, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order.
Shortly thereafter, you received the following disciplinary
actions: on 1 May 1980, you received NUP for breaking
restriction; on 25 August 1980, you were convicted at a summary
court-martial (SCM) of two specifications of disrespect; on 28
October 1980, you received NUP for two specifications of willful
disobedience, failure to obey a lawful order, three
specifications of sleeping on post, and two specifications of
disorderly conduct in public; on 13 August 1981, you received NUP
for disobeying a lawful order; and in February 1982, you were
pending court-martial for disobeying a lawful order, possession
of a controlled substance (marijuana), drug paraphernalia, and
unauthorized absence in excess of 13 days. You requested through
counsel to be separated in lieu of a trial by court-martial with
an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service. At
that time, you acknowledged the consequences of such a discharge.
Your request was granted and on 11 March 1982, 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 claim of having epilepsy and prior honorable service.
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. The Board was unable to find any evidence in your record
to support your claim, and you provided no such evidence.
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,
ROBERT D. ALMAN

Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08336-10

    Original file (08336-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11257-10

    Original file (11257-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 00381-12

    Original file (00381-12.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 29 October 1982, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04332-10

    Original file (04332-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 05796-10

    Original file (05796-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10658-10

    Original file (10658-10.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 20 October 1978, you received NIP for being UA for three days. 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 | CY2008 | 01861-08

    Original file (01861-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2008. Following the SCM, you received the following NJP’s: on 26 September 1980, UA, failure to obey a lawful order, disrespect in language to a superior, and assault, and on 30 December 1980, UA, and failure to obey a lawful order. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00200-09

    Original file (00200-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2009. You were recommended for administrative separation due to a pattern of misconduct, and you exercised your right to request an administrative discharge board (ADB). records.

  • 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 | CY1999 | 05544-09

    Original file (05544-09.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 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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...