DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR GORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 10008-9093
3 November 2009
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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application. on’ 3 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 naval record and applicable
statutes, requlations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was.
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Marine Corps on 28 March 1968. You received
nonjudicial punishment on four occasions for larceny, failure
to obey a lawful order, two instances of dereliction in the
performance of your duties, and failure to report to your
appointed place of duty. You also had a civil charge of
receiving stolen property, and convictions for a traffic
violation and “joy riding.” On 11 September 1970, you
requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good
of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for five
specifications of unauthorized absence totaling 71 days,
willfully disobeying a lawful order, failure to obey a lawful
order, willful destruction of government property, and wrongful
possession of two military identification cards. At that time,
you consulted with qualified military counsel and acknowledged
the adverse consequences of receiving such a discharge. On 21
September 1970, the separation authority approved our request
for an OTH discharge. On 2 October 1970, you were separated
with an OTH discharge for the good of the service to avoid
trial by court-martial. 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.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth | and the
character reference letters you submitted with your |
application. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant 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,
Wea hk \
W. DEAN PPE Fr
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05731-09
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. On 3 April 1969 you began six periods of UA from your unit which totaled 348 days until you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00761-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2010. You are advised that no discharge is upgraded due merely to the passage of time. 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 | CY2011 | 01214-11
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 | CY2010 | 10774-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 2011. On 28 January 1974 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for four instances of failure to go to your appointed place of duty, insubordinate conduct toward a superior noncommissioned officer, escaping from arrest, damage of government property, and two instances of assault. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01209-11
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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05683 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 March 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. 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 | 00048-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2009. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was - ansufficient to establish the existence of probable material | error or injustice. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04082-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2012. On 12 May 1970, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the forgoing periods 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 | CY2008 | 09370-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting:in executive session, considered your — application on 13 August 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. entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04823-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...