DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 —
SON
Docket No: 03836-12
13 March 2013
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 12 March 2013. 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 ali 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 and began a period of active duty on
18 February 1971. The Board found that on 1 September 1971, you
were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 14 days and failure to go to
your appointed place of duty. You were sentenced to a forfeiture
of pay. During the period from 17 September 1971 to 7 September
1972, you received four nonjudicial punishments (NUP’s) for two
periods of UA totaling four days, failure to go to your appointed
place of duty, disobedience, and wrongful possession of habit
forming drugs. The record shows that you submitted a written
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for three period of UA totaling 45 days.
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
31 January 1973, 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 and record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your misconduct that resulted in an SPCM conviction, four
NUJP’s, charges being preferred to a court-martial for periods of
UA totaling over 30 days, 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 Navy 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 ail 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 Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06269-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 07613-10
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in convictions by SCM and SPCM, charges being preferred to a court-martial for a periods of UA totaling over four months, and request for discharge. ...
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 | CY2012 | 04181-12
You served without disciplinary incident until 5 May 1971, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a seven day period of unauthorized absence (UA). On 15 June 1971 you submitted a written request for a hardship discharge which was subsequently disapproved. On 29 March 1972 this request was denied because of your disciplinary, actions during your period of confinement.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03482-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. 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 | CY2010 | 10982-10
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. 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. As a result, on 27 January 1971, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03289-09
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. Your request for _ discharge was granted and on 14 March 1980, you received an other than...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05149-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your record also reflects that on 9 December 1974 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of UA totalling four days, absence from your...