Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1199 14
Original file (NR1199 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
mal

    

 

 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

D FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
1

S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

 

  
  
  
    
 

Ka

session :

WDormowd

nat

 

yyy
upon
other than honorable (OTH) discharge. 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 5 January 1976, you were
discharged under OTH conditions.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating tractors, sucn as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and assertion that your
civil rights were violated. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in a request for discharge. The Board believed that
considerable clemency was axtended 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 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 within one year from the date of the Board's decision.
New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board
prior to making its decision in your case. 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 demonstrace the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

ho

 

nee a a a ET

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3594 14

    Original file (NR3594 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 >@ October 2014. Vou submitted a written i request [or an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial py court-martial for two additional periods of UA totaling over 40 days and.two instances of missing ship’s movement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant te demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5865 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR5865 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together ith all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, applicable statutes, regulations, You enlisted in the Marine Corps iod of active duty on 28 April 1969. Further, the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and should not be permitted to change it now. New evidence is evidence not previously considered...

  • 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 | CY2014 | NR7480 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7480 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 June 2015. 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 another court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3295 14

    Original file (NR3295 14.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. 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. Your request was granted and the commanding officer directed your OTH discharge.

  • 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 | CY2014 | NR3366 14

    Original file (NR3366 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. The Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when your request for discharge was granted and should not be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4376 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR4376 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 Aprii 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all macerial submitted in support thereof, your naval record, anc 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 | CY2014 | NR4376 14

    Original file (NR4376 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 15 April 2015. 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitiaating factors, such as your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6699 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR6699 14_Redacted.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 July 2015. 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...