Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01120-99
Original file (01120-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
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 NAW ANNEX 

, 

WASHINGTON DC  20370-5100 

TJR 
Docket No:  1120-99 
5 August 1999 

Dear - This is in reference to your application for correction of your 

naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 27 July 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient 
to establish the existence of probable material error or 
injustice. 

The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 16 July 1974 
at the age of 19.  Your record shows that you during the period 
from 6 February to 17 September 1975 you were in an unauthorized 
absence  (UA) status on three occasions for 122 days.  On 22 
October 1975 you submitted a written request for an undesirable 
discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the 
foregoing periods of UA.  Your record 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.  Subsequently, on 3 November 1975, your request was 
granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an 
undesirable discharge by reason of the good of the service.  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.  On 6 November 1975 you 
were issued an other than honorable discharged. 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, 
carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth 
and immaturity, and your contention that you would like your 
discharge upgraded.  The Board further considered your contention 
that you were told that your discharge would automatically be 
upgraded.  However, the Board found the evidence and materials 
submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of 
your discharge given the serious nature of your frequent and 
lengthy periods of UA and your request for discharge to avoid 
trial for these offenses.  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.  Further, the Board concluded that you 
received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when 
your request for discharge was granted and you should not be 
permitted to change it now.  Given all the circumstances of your 
case the Board concluded 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 PFE I FFER 
Executive Director 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07460-98

    Original file (07460-98.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 April 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. Given all the circumstances of your case the.Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00646-99

    Original file (00646-99.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 July 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 | CY1999 | 04918-99

    Original file (04918-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. The Board concluded that these factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of an NJP and the fact...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 04010-98

    Original file (04010-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your former husband's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. He received an undesirable discharge on 29 December 1975. In this regard, there is no evidence that he received a general discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07938-98

    Original file (07938-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence...

  • 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 | CY1999 | 07422-98

    Original file (07422-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    imposed was confinement for 30 days. On 9 December 1975 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of UA. case the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and Accordingly, your application has been no change is warranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00847-05

    Original file (00847-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2005. 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 | CY2002 | 10104-02

    Original file (10104-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2003. 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 found that your unauthorized absence of 107 days and prior NJP clearly warranted an undesirable discharge.

  • 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).