DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 08316-10
21 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 20 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 25 June 1968. On 18 April 1969, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NOP) for being absent from your appointed place of
duty. On 8 December 1970, you received NUP for being in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status, willfully disobeying a lawful
order, disobeying a general order, wrongfully having possession
with intent to deceive a pass authorizing you to be in an off
limite avea. On 18 December 1970, you were convicted by a
summary court-martial (SCM) of two incidents of being absent from
your appointed place of duty, and four incidents of breaking
restriction. You were sentenced to forfeitures of $50, reduction
in pay grade, and 45 days restriction. On 19 May 1971, you
esepiwed. SIE fer failure to go be your appointed place of duty.
On 27 September 1971, you received NUP for wrongfully urinating
out the rear hatch of a helicopter, wrongfully using reproachful
language, and wrongfully communicating a threat to a fellow
Marine. On 6 December 1971, you received NJP for being absent
from your appointed place of duty, failure to maintain a clean
rifle, and leaving your post to buy food, then returning to post
while eating. On 16 December 1971, you received NUP for failure
to obey a lawful order. On 10 January 1972, you submitted a
request for a good of the service discharge to avoid trial by
court-martial for disobeying a lawful order, three incidents of
failure to obey a lawful order, and possession of marijuana.
Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you conferred
with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your rights,
and 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 convenience of the government.
Your request for discharge was granted and on 31 January 1972,
you received an OTH for the good of the service in lieu of trial
by court-martial. Asa 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, and
Vietnam combat service, conduct and performance. Nevertheless,
the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
changing the reason or characterization of your discharge, given
six NUJP’s, one conviction by SCM of misconduct, and your request.
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 ia justice .
Sincerely,
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 | 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 | 00214-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 13 October 2011. On 13 December 1961, you received NUP for three incidents of failure to go to your appointed place of duty. - 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 | CY2010 | 03799-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 20 January 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. On 8 September 1973, you submitted a request for a good of the service discharge to avoid trial by court-martial for being absent from your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08336-10
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. You were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
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 | 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 | 02100-09
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 materiai 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 | CY2011 | 00083-11
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. On 23 March 1972, you received NUP for being UA for four days. 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 | 01918-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of GLOn, of your United i Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2008. Documentary material considered by the Boar your application, together with all material submit thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes and policies. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and your letters of...