Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04939 11
Original file (04939 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

SIN
Docket No: 04939-11
1 March 2012

 

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 28 February 2012. 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 December 1972. The Board found that on 20 and

27 November 1973, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
being absent from your appointed place of duty and breaking
restriction. On 20 June 1975, you were convicted by special
court-martial (SPCM) of 131 days of unauthorized absence (UA).
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of
pay, and a reduction in paygrade. During the period from

19 September to 9 December 1975, you had three periods of UA
totaling 77 days. On 26 January 1976, you submitted a written
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for the three periods of UA. 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 request for discharge was granted and on
13 February 1976, you received an other than honorable 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.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record
of service, and belief that your characterization of service
would be automatically upgraded after six months. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct
that resulted in two NJP’s, conviction by SPCM, charges being
referred to a court-martial for a 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. Finally, you are advised that there
is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for
recharacterization automatically after six months or 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,

La Danes

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Diveét

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02408-09

    Original file (02408-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03897-11

    Original file (03897-11.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. On 3 March 1975, the convening authority approved the sentence, but the BCD and a period of confinement at hard labor were suspended for six months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00975-01

    Original file (00975-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your applicatiofi on 10 July 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 1977 you 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 13157 11

    Original file (13157 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 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

    Original file (02723-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2013 | NR4986-13

    Original file (NR4986-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 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. As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01168-01

    Original file (01168-01.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 August 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your frequent and lengthy periods of UA and your request for discharge to avoid trial for a lengthy period of UA. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04820-11

    Original file (04820-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01415-10

    Original file (01415-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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. On 25 June 1973 you received NUP for six periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a one day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2487-13

    Original file (NR2487-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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...