DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION.OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 8, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 3116-13
19 February 2014
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 19 February 2014.. 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
preceedings 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 eonstigersbian of the entire
‘record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient |
to establish the existence of pEobable material error or .
dnjustice .. ae ad 2a 2 =
You enlisted in the "Marine Corps: and began a period of active -
duty on 18 October 1972. You. served. for 10 months without
disciplinary incident but ‘during the- period from. 2 August 1973 to
26 June 1976 you received nonjudicial puriishment (NUP) on eight -
occasions ‘for. absence from your appointed place.of duty,. two.
specifications of disrespect, failure :to go to your appointed:
place of duty, two specifications: of assault; failure to obey a
lawful ‘order;-a two day period’ ‘of. unauthorized absence (UA); and
_ wrongful possession of marijuana and’ drug paraphernalia. During
the period from.il. ‘August: ‘to 20 September: 1976 you were again in
a UA status on four more occasions for 17 days, However, the
record does not reflect the’ disciplinary‘action taken, if any,
for this misconduct.
on 20. ‘October 1976 you submitted a. written’ vequest for an other
than honorable discharge’ in order ‘to avoid. trial by. court-martial .
for disrespect, disobedience, and communicating a threat with a _
tire iron. Prior to submitting this request you conferred with a
qualified military: camyer” at which time you ‘were advised of your
rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. On 30 November 1976 you received
your ninth NJP for a six day period of UA. Subsequently, on 6
December 1976, 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 21 December 1976 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 desire to°upgrade your discharge because you were granted
permission to separate 11 days early. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness
of your repetitive misconduct in both the military and civilian
communities which also resulted in 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. 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.
‘ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11618-10
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03379-11
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. About two months later, on 7 June 1972, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for disobedience, absence from your appointed place of duty, and disrespect. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6920 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 July 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. It appears that you requested discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the latter period of UA totalling 78 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5017 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2487-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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 | CY2013 | NR4986-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 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. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09191-04
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 25 July 1972 at age 18. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02723-11
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 | CY2013 | NR8333 13
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 | CY2006 | 09507-06
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 6 February 1975 at age 17. However, your request was denied and...