DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 07199-10
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 14 June 1972. On 2 October 1973, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to go to your appointed
place of duty. On 29 October 1973, you received NJP for failure
to obey and disobeying a lawful order. Om 25 February 1974, you
received NUP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty,
and failure to obey a lawful order. On 8 March 1974, you
received NUP for wrongfully appropriating a government Jeep, and
breaking restriction. On 11 April 1974, you were convicted at a
summary court-martial (SCM) of being in an unauthorized absence
(UA) status from the rifle range, disobeying a lawful order, and
failure to obey a lawful order. You were sentenced to a
forfeiture of $150, and 45 days restriction. Between 10 April
and 23 April 1974, you had eight periods of UA, failure to go to
your appointed place of duty, willfully disobeyed a lawful order,
and had two incidents of being disrespectful in language toward a
senior noncommissioned officer. On 28 May 1974, you submitted a
request for a good of the service discharge to avoid trial by
court-martial for the above mentioned pending charges. 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 for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-
martial. 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. 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. 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 overall record of 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 four NJP’s, conviction by one SCM, periods of UA,
and request for 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 the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
\pQee DFETE
Executive Diy ne x
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06011-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 09068-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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 7 November 1975, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 13157 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 August 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. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your serious...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02723-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06004-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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 | CY2009 | 11060-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2010. The Board found that you entered active duty in the Navy on 26 July 1974 and were honorably discharged on 1 June 1978. You then requested an other than honorable (OTH) discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for three periods of UA totaling 64 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06920-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2011. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...