Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR202 14
Original file (NR202 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
SEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

Joi S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE i1vUul
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

TAL
Docket No: 202-14
12 December 2014

dear

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.

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits. A
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on

3 December 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.

Biter 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 and began a period of active
duty on 1 July 1965. You served for three years and four months
without disciplinary incident, but on 9 December 1968 you were in
an unauthorized absence (UA) status from your unit until you
surrendered on 31 October 1975, a period of six years and nine
months. You made a written request for discharge for the good of
the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the forgoing
period of UA. 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. Your request was granted and the
commanding officer directed your 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 December 1975, you were discharged under OTH conditions.
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. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your misconduct and requést for discharge. The Board believed
that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request

Cnn St aA asta FR arr tA FEMI h
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 ae
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 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 demonstrate the existence of probable material

error or injustice.

Sincerely,

   

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5666 13

    Original file (NR5666 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 21 May 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

    Original file (NR4986-13.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 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 04352-11

    Original file (04352-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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. 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 | CY2010 | 03722-10

    Original file (03722-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 12 January 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04820-11

    Original file (04820-11.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 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2331-13

    Original file (NR2331-13.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 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. Further, the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08088-09

    Original file (08088-09.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 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 | CY2011 | 02637-11

    Original file (02637-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 December 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. On 11 December 1975, you made a written request for discharge under other than honorable (OTH) conditions to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5894 13

    Original file (NR5894 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 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. From 22 July 1969 through 16 September 1970, you were UA from your unit on five occasions totaling a period of 320 days.