DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 2555-11
30 November 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, 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 22 November 2011. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 26 April 1968 at age 17. You received nonjucidicial
punishment (NUP) on two occasions for two instances of
unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit for a period totaling
eight days and two instances of failure to go to your appointed
place of duty. On 20 August 1969 you were UA from your unit
until 13 October 1969, a period of 54 days. On 17 October 1969
you were UA from your unit until 6 November 1969, a period of 20
days. On 28 November 1969, you were again UA from your unit
until 16 December 1969, for a period of 18 days. On 22 January
1970, you made a written request for discharge for the good of
service to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods
of UA. Prior to submitting this request you conferred with a
qualified military lawyer at which time you were advised of your
rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. Your request was granted and the
commanding officer directed you're other than honorable (OTH)
discharge. 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. On
10 February 1970, you were apprehended by civil authorities in
Arlington, Virginia on a charge of robbery. On 2 March 1970,
while in the hands of civil authorities, you were discharged
under OTH conditions.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, periods of UA totaling
over three months and request for discharge. The Board believed
that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request
for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved.
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. 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,
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D
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 | CY2012 | 00624 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 October 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 4 June 1970, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court- martial for two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5894 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 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. From 22 July 1969 through 16 September 1970, you were UA from your unit on five occasions totaling a period of 320 days.
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 | 05832-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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 | CY2013 | NR8164 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04352-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. 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 | 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 | 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 | 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...