Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08351-10
Original file (08351-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
REC

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
Docket No: 08351-10
4 May 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 4 May 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 February 1968, at age 19. On 4 February 1970, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for causing damage to a
government vehicle and building. On 17 February 1970, you were
convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of breaking
restriction. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for
30 days, and a reduction in pay grade. On 8 May 1970, you were
convicted by a second SCM of being in an unauthorized absence

(UA) status for 13 days. You were sentenced to a forte1ture: Cf
$100, and confinement at hard labor for 30 days. On 28 March
1970, you began a period of UA lasting 16 days. On 6 July 1970,
you began an additional UA period lasting 50 days. Subsequently,
on 2 November 1970, you submitted a written request for an
administrative discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for the periods of UA. 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 request for
discharge was granted and on 17 November 1970, you received an
other than honorable (OTH) discharge 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.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
Vietnam combat service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of your misconduct that resulted in one NUP,
convictions by two SCM’s, periods of UA totaling over two months,
and request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was
approved. 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. Further, you are advised that there is no provision in the
law or Navy regulations that allows for recharacterization of
your discharge automatically due solely to the passage of time.
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,

LY aha

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01298-09

    Original file (01298-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. , 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 of injustice. Your request for discharge was granted and on 19 December 1972, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08092-06

    Original file (08092-06.rtf) 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.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 October 1969 at age 17. However, your request was denied and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06320-01

    Original file (06320-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    request for discharge was granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an undesirable discharge. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you On 10 March 1972 The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, service in Vietnam, and your contention that because of your personality disorder you could not adjust to duty in the United States after your tour of Vietnam. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10974-02

    Original file (10974-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2003. On 24 June 1968 you were convicted by SCM of a 15 day period of UA and sentenced to a $65 forfeiture of pay and confinement at hard labor for 30 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 | CY2011 | 05736-11

    Original file (05736-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 November 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12074-09

    Original file (12074-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. On 2 April 1969, you then began a period of UA which lasted 96 days. Your request for discharge was granted and on 11 May 1970, you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • 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 | CY2009 | 12082-09

    Original file (12082-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | CY2013 | NR3686 13

    Original file (NR3686 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. On 20 June 1977 a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board {NDRB}, convened under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions. the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01220-00

    Original file (01220-00.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. were so discharged. 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.