Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06797-07
Original file (06797-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                                              BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                                      2 NAVY ANNEX
                                              WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


SJN
 Docket No: 06797-07
17 June 2008

From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
Subj : REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
Ref:     (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552
End:     (1) DD Form 149 with attachments
 (2)      Case Summary
(3)      Subject’s naval record
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) , Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting an upgrade of his other than honorable (0TH) discharge.
2.       The Board, consisting of Mr. Mr. , and Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 10 June 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3.       The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice finds as follows:
a.       Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.       Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statue of limitations and review the application on its merits.
c.       Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 16 July 1973 at age
 20, having previously served honorably in the Marine Corps. On
21 June 1974, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for three
days of unauthorized absence (UA) . He received restriction and
extra duty.
d.       On 31 July 1974, Petitioner began a period of UA lasting 90 days, ending on 29 October 1974. On 19 November 1974 he submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the UA period. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, he would have conferred with a qualified military lawyer, been advised of his rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Petitioner’s request for discharge was granted and on 6 December 1974 he received an 0TH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. As a result of this action, he was spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.
e.       With his application, Petitioner states that he was wrong by going UA, but turned himself in after saving his marriage. He also stated he wanted to continue serving his full enlistment after accepting the consequences of his actions.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action.
The record reflects that Petitioner was properly separated with an 0TH. However, the Board concludes that despite his NJP and request for the good of service discharge, relief is warranted as a matter of clemency and, the record should reflect a general characterization of service. The Board also notes his limited education, prior honorable service, and the character letters accompanying his application. In view of the foregoing, the Board recommends the following corrective action:
RECOMMENDATION:
a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 6 December 1974 Petitioner was issued a general discharge vice the 0TH discharge actually issued on that date.
b.       That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
c.       That upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner’s application was received on 31 July 2007.
 4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
         
RO BERT D. ZSALMAN        BRIAN J. GEORGE
Recorder         Acting Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a) , has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

                  W. DEAN PFEIFFER
 Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06917-07

    Original file (06917-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 13 December 1974, a service record entry was made which stated that his recommendation for administrative separation was forwarded to the separation authority. On 30 August 1976, Petitioner’s commanding officer forwarded the administrative separation recommendation to the separation authority. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the time lost for the period 21 December 1974 to 12 January 1977.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07816-07

    Original file (07816-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 15 August 1990, the chaplain provided a letter to the commanding officer which stated that Petitioner and his wife were both immature, and that after one problem was resolved, another problem would arise. He concluded by recommending that Petitioner should be discharged for the good of the service. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he was separated with a general discharge on 9 November 1990, vice the 0TH discharge issued on that date.b.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06912-07

    Original file (06912-07.rtf) 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.On 10 April 1973, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent. On 23 May 1977,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06883-07

    Original file (06883-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMWDocket No: 6883-07 21 March 2008From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. On 13 May 1982, a psychiatric evaluation diagnosed him as having an immature personality, and emotional and intellectualproblems. However, the Board believes that Petitioner did not warrant an 0TH characterization of service, given...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06820-07

    Original file (06820-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5~OOSJNDocket No: 06820-07 17 June 2008From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OFRef: (a) 10 U.S.C:. The Board, consisting of Mr. Mr. - and Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 10 June 2008 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the limited corrective action indicated below should be taken on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08177-05

    Original file (08177-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting an upgrade of his other than honorable discharge.2 T d, consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 8 March 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. On 5 June 1986 an ADB, unanimously found that Petitioner had...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06693-07

    Original file (06693-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SJNDocket No: 06693-07 2 June 2008From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj REVIEW OF N VAL RECORD OFRef: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting a change to his RE-4 reenlistment code.2 The Board consisting of reviewed Petitioner’s...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07995-05

    Original file (07995-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS` 2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SJNDocket No: 07995-05 3 March 2006From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. The Board, consisting of Mr_ Mr. and Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s record of error and injustice on 1 March 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02389-07

    Original file (02389-07.rtf) 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.On 8 July 2004, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. The Board did not consider whether the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02389-07

    Original file (02389-07.rtf) 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.On 8 July 2004, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. The Board did not consider whether the...