Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3465 14
Original file (NR3465 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001

ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 _
SJN

Docket No: 3
7 April 2015

 

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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

31 March 2015. 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 enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 23 October 1989. The record shows that on 1 March 1993,
you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that lasted 37
days, ending on 7 April 1993. On 14 April 1993, you were
arrested by civil authorities for uttering worthless checks. On
21 April 1993, you were sentenced to a period of probation, to
pay restitution, and court cost. Your record is incomplete, in
that it does not contain all of the documents pertaining to your
discharge. It appears that you submitted a written request for
an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial
by court-martial for 37 days of UA. Prior to submitting this
request for discharge, you woulda have conferred with a qualified
military lawyer, were advised of your rights, and warned of the
probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.
Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and on

17 May 1993, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by
court-martial. 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.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your record of service, post service accomplishments, character
letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Nevertheless, the
. Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given what appears to be for
a period of UA that lasted over 30 days, and request for
Gischarge. The Board believed that considerable clemency was
extended to you when your request for discharge was approved.

The Board also 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.

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,

Executive Director

 

~— “— —— —
y= aw Se Tetons cer ins
i <==

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7688 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7688 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 8 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. 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 | 04847-11

    Original file (04847-11.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. On 19 May 1993, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court- Martial for the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4966 14

    Original file (NR4966 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 12 May 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08345-10

    Original file (08345-10.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. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05722-09

    Original file (05722-09.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, regquiations, and policies. On 19 July 1993, the separation authority approved an OTH discharge for the good of the service. 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 | CY2014 | NR6331 14

    Original file (NR6331 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 6 May 2015. 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR11941 14

    Original file (NR11941 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 28 January 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12122-10

    Original file (12122-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two NUP’s, conviction by SPCM of a lengthy period of UA, and your request for discharge to avoid trial for a period of UA lasting over 15 months. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7833 13

    Original file (NR7833 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 8 July 2014. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 19 April .1996, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02680-08

    Original file (02680-08.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 May 2009. 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 you returned to the Marine Corps you submitted a handwritten letter to the Marine Corps requesting, in effect, that you be given clemency for...