DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 05736-11
1 December 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 29 November 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 15 August 1967. The Board found that on 25 May 1970, you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 199 days. You were sentenced
to confinement at hard labor, a forfeiture of pay, a reduction in
paygrade, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 1 June 1970, you
began a period of UA that lasted 107 days, ending with your
apprehension on 16 September 1970. While you were in a UA
status, you were apprehended by civil authorities for theft of a
motor vehicle, and on 18 July 1970, the convening authority
suspended your reduction in paygrade and BCD for three months.
On 1 December 1970, you were convicted by a second SPCM of 107
days of UA. You received a reduction in paygrade and a
forfeiture of pay. On 18 January 1971, you began another period
of UA that lasted 207 days, ending with your apprehension on
13 August 1971. On 8 November 1971, you submitted a written
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for the 207 days 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 26
November 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge 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.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, service in Vietnam, post service medical issues, and
contention of having Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) at the
time of your misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your misconduct that resulted in two SPCM for
periods of UA totaling over 10 months, charges being preferred to
a court-martial for a period of UA totaling over six 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. Concerning your contention that your post-service diagnosed
PTSD contributed to your misconduct, there is no evidence in the
record to support it, and you submitted no such evidence.
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,
Wu-Q
W. DEAN PFEVRF
Executive Dikectsr
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02095-02
10, United A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 31 June 1971 you submitted a written and warned of the probable Your request for discharge was granted and on 22 July 1971 you received an undesirable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07427-05
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 28 March 1968 at age 18. As a result, on 5 March 1971, you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01298-09
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 | CY2007 | 07775-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2008. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04823-11
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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3686 13
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 | CY2006 | 04664-06
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 Navy on 1 August 1969 at age 18. After you were restored to duty you received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04903-01
Your allegations of error and 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 were sentenced to confinement at hard labor On 30 January 1970 you were convicted by SPCM of a 99 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for a month, restriction for a month, and an $80 forfeiture of pay. submitted a written request for an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10686-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 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 15 December 1970, you submitted a written request to be discharged for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the periods of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06656-07
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 Navy on 12 October 1951 at age 18. Nevertheless, the Board found that these...