DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC
Docket No: 07192-10
7 April 2011
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 6 April 2011. 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 and began a period of active
duty on 29 August 1968. On 29 March 1969, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for being in an unauthorized absence
(UA) status for 47 days. On 10 August 1969, you received NJP for
being UA one day. On 1 December 1969, you received NJP for
disobeying a lawful order. On 10 April 1970, you submitted a
request for a good of the service discharge to avoid trial by
court-martial for two incidents of UA, being disrespectful to and
disobeying a commissioned officer, and wrongful possession of
marijuana. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you
conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your
rights, and were warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. Your commanding officer forwarded
his recommendation that you be discharged under other than
honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of good of the service.
Your request for discharge was granted and on 4 May 1970, you
received an OTH discharge for the good of the service an. dew ok
trial by court-martial. As a result of this action, you were
aint
he
spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential
penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.
At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, conduct
and performance, and Vietnam combat service. Nevertheless, the
Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
changing the reason or characterization of your discharge, given
your record of three NUP’s for misconduct, and the fact that you
requested this discharge. The Board also 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. 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 che
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09118-10
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 4 June 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge (OTH) for the good of service to avoid trial by court-martial. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08316-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2011. 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 | CY2011 | 02555-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 November 2011. 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 | CY2009 | 03584-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2010. On 22 November 1968, you received NUP for UA from you appointed place of duty. On 28 May 1970 you were 8O discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07199-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2011. 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 18 June 1974, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03551-11
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. On 19 May 1971, you were so discharged.
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 | CY2013 | NR8218 13
_A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval . Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2014. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 07487-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 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. On 23 December 1970, you again made a written request for discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for UA from your unit...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09065-10
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 28 February 1974, you received NUP for a seven day UA period. 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.