' injustice.
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7O1S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
' ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR .
Docket No: 3535-13
21 March 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. ue ,
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 18 March 2014. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnisled 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
You enlisted in the Navy on 13 November 1975 and immediately
began a period of active duty. You served for about seven months
-without incident. However, on 13 June and again on 14 July 1976,
you received nonjudicial punishment. (NUP) for wrongful possession
failure to obey a lawful order.
of marijuana, absence from -your appointed: place of duty, and
During the period from 25 March to 21 Ot¢tober 1977 you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status.on four occasions. As a result
of the foregoing periods of UA totalling 133 days, on 15 December
“1977, you submitted a written request for .an 6ther 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 consequencés of accepting such a -
discharge. Subsequently; on’6 January 1978, 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 10 January
1978 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 were
tpid that your discharge would be upgraded six months after your
separation. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge —
‘because of the seriousness of your misconduct which included drug
possession 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
Navy 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.
With that being said; no discharge is automatically upgraded due
solely to the passage of time. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. 7
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.
dn 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,
TR VT
-ROBERT D. ~ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06473-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 June 2010. As a result, on 21 March 1978, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing three periods of UA totalling 31 days and desertion resulting from a 127 day period of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
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 | NR2630-13
Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 19 February. Because you requested discharge in lieu of trial, you avoided the possibility of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. 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 | CY2009 | 12305-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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. However, on 9 June 1978, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08742-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | CY2013 | NR6077 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 01945-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ° Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10229-10
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. You reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 25 February 1975 after nearly two years and eight months of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01837-08
You were subsequently assigned to an infantry unit at Camp Pendleton. The Board also 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. 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.