DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 7422-98
9 April 1999
Dear
This is in reference to your
naval record pursuant to the
States Code, Section 1552.
application for correction of your
provisions of Title 10, United
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 6 April 1999.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings
Board.
your application,
thereof, your naval record,
and policies.
of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
together with all material submitted in support
and applicable statutes, regulations,
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.
The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 1 August 1972 at the
Your record shows that on 13 April 1973 you received
age of 18.
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for three incidents of absence from
your appointed place of duty and three incidents of disobedience.
The punishment imposed was restriction for 30 days, reduction to
paygrade E-l, and forfeitures totalling $100.
suspended for six months.
for a 31 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
imposed was forfeitures totalling $300,
and reduction to
paygrade E-l.
October 1973 for disobedience,
absence from your appointed place of duty.
imposed was confinement for 30 days.
restriction for 30 days,
You received your third NJP on 2
failure to obey a lawful order and
The punishment
The reduction was
On 19 September 1973 you received NJP
The punishment
Your record further reflects that on 31 May and again on 10
October 1974 you received NJP for three incidents of disrespect
On 27 November 1974 you
and failure to obey a lawful order.
began a 359 day period of UA that was not terminated until 21
November 1975.
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.
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
On 26 January 1976 your request was
accepting such a discharge.
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.
were issued an other than honorable discharge.
On 6 February 1976 you
Your record shows
The Board further considered your contention
However, the Board found the
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.
that you need help with your life.
evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
NJPs, your
your frequent misconduct,
lengthy period of UA, and especially your request for discharge
to avoid trial for this offense.
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
Further, the Board concluded
labor and a punitive discharge.
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.
case the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and
Accordingly, your application has been
no change is warranted.
denied.
Given all the circumstances of your
which resulted in five
The Board believed that
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
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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 PE'EIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00646-99
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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07460-98
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 | CY2002 | 08125-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 April 1973 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and a five day period of UA. November 1976, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03773-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repeated misconduct and lengthy period of UA, which also resulted in your request for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08267-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2003. 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. On 26 June 1975 you received NJP for two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded restriction for seven days and a $100 forfeiture of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02080-02
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 Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. discharge was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00975-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your applicatiofi on 10 July 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 1977 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 | 04465-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 November 2001. 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 record does not indicate if any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA. good post service conduct, and your However, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04706-06
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 Marine Corps on 18 January 1974 at age 17. Prior to submitting this request for...