Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 11827 11
Original file (11827 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

CRS
Docket No: 11827-11
6 November 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 22 August 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 on 12 May 1971. On 1 December
1971, you were convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of
being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on two occasions
which totaled 30 days. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of
$150, and confinement at hard labor for 30 days. On 13 March
1972, you commenced a period of UA lasting 361 days. On 6 April
1973, a mental health evaluation was conducted and you were
diagnosed with emotionally unstable personality disorder with
passive dependent traits. On 20 April 1973, you submitted a
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for the lengthy period 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 11 May
1973, you received an other than honorable discharge (OTH) for
the good of service to avoid 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, and
overall record. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of your conviction by a SCM of misconduct,
period of UA, 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 Marine Corps 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,

pent ‘
W. DEAN (Za

Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04059-11

    Original file (04059-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. On 4 December 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court- martial for two...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 01217-00

    Original file (01217-00.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. 1971 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 | CY2001 | 00791-01

    Original file (00791-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2001. 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 17 October 1974 you were convicted by SCM of a 36 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05233-01

    Original file (05233-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11642-10

    Original file (11642-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 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. As a result of the foregoing, on 17 November 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09060-07

    Original file (09060-07.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 November 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06606-01

    Original file (06606-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 00503-11

    Original file (00503-11.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. As a result, on 26 June 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods of UA totalling 144 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...