Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3253-13
Original file (NR3253-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

TIR
Docket No: 3253-13
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
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 erilisted in’ the: Marine Corps on 11 February 1975 and -
. immediately began a period of active duty. You served for. about

three months without incident. However, during. the period from

/-11° May to 21 September 1975 you-were convicted by civil

authorities on two occasions‘of disorderly ‘conduct, resisting
arrest, and petty ‘larceny. You were also in an unauthorized .
absence (UA) Status on three’ occasions.

As a result of the. foregoing’ three. periods ‘of UA totalling 129

days, on 31 October 1975, you. submitted a written request. for an
other. than honorable: discharge | in order'to avoid’ trial by court-
Martial. 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. Subsequently, 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 3 December.
1975 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 and assertion that you
needed and were denied an extended leave period after the death
of your father. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors

were not sufficiént to warrant recharacterization- of your

discharge because of the seriousness of your misconduct in the
civil community and repetitive periods of UA which 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. Finally, there is no

‘evidence in the record, and you provided none, to support your

assertion. 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 Hoard.

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,

Th panna >, <——

ROBERT D. Z
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2582-13

    Original file (NR2582-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08741-07

    Original file (08741-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. As a result, on 28 February 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6920 13

    Original file (NR6920 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 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 | CY2014 | NR3342 14

    Original file (NR3342 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09060-07

    Original file (09060-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. 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 | CY2014 | NR3342 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR3342 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board, in its review of your entire record and application carefully weighed a+l potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgr~de your discharge and assertion of post(cid:173) traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) . New evidence is evidence not previously considered by In this the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2015 | NR1536 15_Redacted

    Original file (NR1536 15_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    tatute of limitations and consider your application on its A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2015. Subsequently, you submitted a written request for a honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for four periods of UA totalling 239 days. On 21 February 1975, your request was granted and the commandina officer was directed to issue you an other than honorable | discharge by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11186-06

    Original file (11186-06.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 21 June 1973 at age 21. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 06276-09

    Original file (06276-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. During the period from 1 June to 13 December 1976 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on two occasions.