DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX REC
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5106 Docket No: 00618-09
24 November 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
late husband's naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title
10, United States Code, Section 1552.
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 24 November 2009. 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 late husband's naval record, and applicable
statutes, regulations, and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
recora, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
vour husband enlisted in the Marine Corps on 7 December 1967, at
age 18. On 9 June 1969, he was convicted by special court-
martial for unauthorized absence (UA) and wrongful possession of
3,18 grams of marijuana. He was sentenced to forfeiture of $296,
reduction in pay grade, confinement at hard labor and to receive
a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Subsequently, his BCD was not
approved by the convening authority. On 5 November 1969, he
received nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for unauthorized absence
(UA). On 17 November 1969, he began various periods of UA
totaling 37 days. Subsequently, upon his return, on 19 February
1970, he submitted a request for an administrative discharge in
order to avoid trial by another court-martial for the additional
periods of UA. Prior to submitting this request for discharge,
he conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of
his rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. His request for discharge was
granted with special consideration due to the fact he was
originally to receive a BCD, and on 20 March 1970, he received an
other than honorable @ischarge in lieu of trial by court-martial.
As a result of this action, he was spared the stigma of an
additional court-martial conviction and the potential penaities
of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.
The Board, in its review of your husband's record and your
application, carefully weighted all potentially mitigating
factors, such as his youth, overall record of service, and
particularly, his combat service in Vietnam. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of his discharge because of the frequency of
his misconduct, as shown by the NUP, and SPCM conviction for UA,
possession of marijuana and the additional UA period totaling 37
days. The Board especially noted that on one occasion, your
husband was given an opportunity to earn a better
characterization of service when the BCD was disapproved.
However, he committed further misconduct. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04389-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. About six months later, on 8 January 1969, he received NUP for a nine day period of UA. 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 | CY2012 | 00575-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2012. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08496-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. 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 ali material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03787-01
Thereafter, the discharge authority approved the request and directed an undesirable discharge and you were so discharged on 26 February 1970. Board concluded that the foregoing factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NJPs, convictions by a summary and a special court-martial, and the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for a 31-day period of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02600-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 14 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. He was On 24 March 1970, your husband was convicted by summary martial of an unauthorized absence from 12 February to 2 March 1970. court-martial, 46 days of unauthorized absence and his extensive in-service drug usage supported his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01430-02
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. request for discharge was granted and your commanding officer was As a result of directed to issue you an undesirable discharge. extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved since, by this action, you escaped the possibility of confinement at...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04010-98
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your former husband's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. He received an undesirable discharge on 29 December 1975. In this regard, there is no evidence that he received a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01628-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 2009. your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your late husband's discharge because of the seriousness of his misconduct and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00588-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s 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...