Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02688-09
Original file (02688-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BAN
Decket No: 2688-09
8 December 2009

 

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 2 December 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 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 23 February 1966, and served
without disciplinary incident until 18 August 1966, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence
(UA) in excess of 18 days. Shortly thereafter, you received the
following disciplinary actions: on 28 June*1968, you were
convicted at a special court-martial-for two specifications of
UA, totaling seven and one-half months; and on 2 August 1968, you
were convicted at a summary court-martial for UA in excess of 16
days. Additionally, on 7 August 1968, you were apprehended by
civil authorities and on 30 October 1968, you were convicted for
battery. You were pending a court-martial for further
Misconduct; however, on 24 January 1969, you requested to be
separated for the good of the service (GOS) with an undesirable
discharge (UD). At that time, you consulted with counsel and
acknowledged the consequences of receiving such a discharge. The
separation authority approved your request and on 14 February
1969, you were separated for the GOS with a UD and an RE-4
reenlistment code. As a result of this action, you were spared
the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the penalties of a
punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.

The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth and your
Vietnam service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a recharacterization of
your discharge due to the seriousness of your repetitive
misconduct. Furthermore, the Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to
avoid trial by court-martial was approved. It was also clear to
the Board that you received the benefit of your bargain with the
Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you
should not be permitted to change it now. In view of the above,
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,

W. DEAN DFEKF
D&re

Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09486-08

    Original file (09486-08.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04910-08

    Original file (04910-08.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. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change it now. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03697-08

    Original file (03697-08.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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 25 March 1976, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04439-08

    Original file (04439-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 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. During the period 15 to 26 May 1968, while still in Vietnam, you were in a UA status.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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. 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 | CY2008 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 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. 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 | CY2009 | 03186-09

    Original file (03186-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12237-09

    Original file (12237-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 November 2009. After appellate review, on 16 May 1969, you were separated from the naval service with a BCD and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your conviction at your final SPCM. 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 | CY2008 | 09620-08

    Original file (09620-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 Juiy 2009. 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. 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 | CY2009 | 02720-09

    Original file (02720-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of...