DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 10416-02
12 September 2003
for correction of your
Your allegations of error and
This is in reference to your application
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 9 September 2003.
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 on 16 September 1969 at age 17.
(NJP) for
On 15 December 1969 you received nonjudicial punishment
an unspecified offense and were awarded a suspended forfeiture of
pay.
On 17 June 1971 you received NJP for disrespect and were awarded
reduction to
forfeiture of pay.
The reduction was suspended for three months.
On 13 September 1971 you were referred for a medical evaluation
due to multiple fragment wounds incurred on 29 June 1970 as a
result of a booby trap injury sustained while serving in Vietnam.
You were diagnosed with partial loss of function in your left
leg, possible neuritis, and nerve damage, all of which was
secondary to shrapnel wounds.
duty.
reevaluation.
However,
found fit for full duty.
On 16 September 1971 you appealed and requested a
paygrade E-2, extra duty for 30 days, and a $50
However, you were found fit for
your appeal was denied and you were again
However, you were found fit for full
Subsequently, on
On 8 February 1972 you were referred for a medical evaluation due
to fragmentation wounds to your left calf and right thigh.
were diagnosed with soft tissue wounds with no demonstrable
residual deficit, and it was recommended that you be found fit
You later appealed this diagnoses, and requested
for duty.
release from active duty.
duty and your request was subsequently denied.
11 and 19 December 1972 you received NJP for absence from your
appointed place of duty and sleeping on watch.
On 17 April and again on 14 May 1973 you received NJP for a one
day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and leaving your post
without proper relief.
During the period from 4 June 1973 to 15 March 1976 you were in a
UA status on four occasions for 981 days.
On 30 March 1976 you
submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge
in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing
Prior to submitting this request for discharge,
periods of UA.
you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of
your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge.
granted and on 30 April 1976 you received an other than honorable
discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.
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 youth and immaturity, combat service in Vietnam during which
you were wounded in action,
and your contention that your overall
service record was not given due consideration.
considered your contention that your discharge should be upgraded
so that your son could receive a flag.
Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors and contentions were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your
frequent misconduct, and especially the repetitive and lengthy
periods of UA which resulted in your request for discharge.
Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you
when your request for discharge was approved since, by this
action, you escaped the possibility of confinement at hard labor
and a punitive discharge.
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.
The Board also concluded that you
Your request for discharge was
As a result of this
You
It also
The
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
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.
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 Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05407-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. review, you were so discharged on 15 September 1976. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08125-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 April 1973 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and a five day period of UA. November 1976, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03382-06
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 on 29 April 1971 at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06320-01
request for discharge was granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an undesirable discharge. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you On 10 March 1972 The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, service in Vietnam, and your contention that because of your personality disorder you could not adjust to duty in the United States after your tour of Vietnam. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01536 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03202-01
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. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 3 October 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. discharge authority approved the request...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03706-07
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2008. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted, and on 11 May 1973 you received an undesirable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct and lengthy periods of UA, which also resulted in your request for discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12405-09
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 recharacterization...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01415-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. On 25 June 1973 you received NUP for six periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a one day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07732-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. However, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the lengthy periods of UA and...