Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6331 14
Original file (NR6331 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

 

ES
Docket No: 6331-14
13 May 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

6 May 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 14 February 1974. You served for about five
months without disciplinary incident, but during the period from
15 July 1974 to 19 April 1977, you were convicted by summary
court-martial (SCM) and received two nonjudicial punishments
(NUP) for unauthorized absence (UA), totaling 125 days and
failure to go to place of duty. On 8 December 1976, you were in
an UA status from your unit until 8 March 1977, a period of 90
days. 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
whee

— —EE ——— ee ———

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 29
April 1977, 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, based on
the information currently contained in your record, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant an
upgrade of your discharge given the seriousness of your
misconduct and 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 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,

    

ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5349 14

    Original file (NR5349 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 20 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. On 13 June 1978, you received NUP for a seven day period of UA from your unit.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR955 13

    Original file (NR955 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 16 October 2013. 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. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • 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 | CY2014 | NR2370 14

    Original file (NR2370 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 11 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09505-09

    Original file (09505-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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. On 23 August 1978, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR975 13

    Original file (NR975 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 22 October 2013. 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. You then requested an under conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a...

  • 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 | CY2013 | NR3207-13

    Original file (NR3207-13.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. discharge. of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08308-10

    Original file (08308-10.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 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01347-10

    Original file (01347-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 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. 23 February 1978, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...