D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E N A V Y
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203705100
TRG
Docket No: 1657-98
14 April 1999
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 13 April 1999. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 20
January 1971 at age 17. The record shows that you received
nonjudicial punishment on two occasions for two instances of
disobedience. The record also shows that during the period 26
April to 24 August 1972 you participated in operations in the
contiguous waters of Vietnam.
On 12 January 1973 you began a period of unauthorized absence
which lasted until you were apprehended by civil authorities on
30 May 1973, a period of about 138 days. The record shows that
you were then held by civil authorities until 1 August 1973. On
15 August 1973 you began another period of unauthorized absence
which lasted until 27 September 1973, a period of about 42 days.
Your military record shows that on 23 October 1973 you submitted
a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods of unauthorized
absence totaling about 180 days. Your record also shows that
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. The Board found that your request was granted on
4 December 1973 and, 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.
You were discharged on 7 December 1973.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, limited
education and,,your statement concerning your deprived background.
The Board also considered your contention that the discharge
processing was improper because you could not make an intelligent
decision to request discharge because you were withdrawing from
drugs and alcohol, you were never offered rehabilitation for your
substance abuse problems, and no consideration was given for your
period of good service. The Board found that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given your record of misconduct'and especially your request for
discharge to avoid trial for two periods of unauthorized absence
totaling about 180 days. The Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to
avoid trial by court-martial was approved since, by this action,
you escaped the possibility of confinement at hard labor and a
punitive discharge. In effect, mitigating factors were
considered in making this decision. Further, the Board concluded
that you received the benefit of your bargain when your request
for discharge was granted and should not be permitted to change
it now. In addition, the Board noted that there is no evidence
in the record, and you have submitted none, concerning a drug or
alcohol abuse problem. However, even if you suffered from such a
problem there was no requirement to retain you for
rehabilitation. Finally, there is no indication that you were
unable to make an informed decision to request discharge. The
Board concluded that your discharge was proper as issued and no
change is warranted.
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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07268-07
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.On 15 September 1977, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17. On 17 October 1982, you began another UA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08965-06
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.On 24 January 1972 you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. Furthermore, the Board believed that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07417-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2009. Your military record shows that you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge (UD) in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 575 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10778-06
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.On 24 February 1986 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 26 after two prior periods of honorable service....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09812-06
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. On 4 June 1975 your request for an undesirable discharge was approved by the separation authority. 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 | CY2005 | 09294-05
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps for four years on 23 February 1966 at age 19. Your military...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03087-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of misconduct and especially your request...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04043-02
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. Nine days later, you began another period of unauthorized absence that lasted until Your military record you were apprehended on 5 August 1974. shows that you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for these two periods of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04461-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 1999. 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 | CY2007 | 09060-07
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...