Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01860-01
Original file (01860-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No: 1860-01
9 October 2001

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 2 October 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
your application,
thereof,
and policies.

Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
together with all material submitted in support
your naval record, 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 Marine Corps on 23 November
1973 at the age of 18.
again on 20 April 1972 you received nonjudicial punishment
for fighting and an 11 day period of unauthorized absence

Your record reflects that on 27 March and
 
(NJP)
WA).
 

Your record also reflects that during the period from 6 July 1972
to 26 January 1975 you were UA on eight occasions for a total of
512 days.
On 6 May 1975 you submitted a written request for an
undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for the foregoing periods of UA.
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.
commanding officer was directed to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of the good of the service.
result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a  
martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
discharge and confinement at hard labor.
issued an other than honorable discharged.

Subsequently, your request was granted and your

Your record shows that prior to

As a

court-

On 22 May 1975 you were

The Board found the evidence and

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 your periods of UA were
the result of your commanding officer taking away your military
occupation specialty (MOS).
However, the Board noted that you
submitted no evidence to support this contention, and the record
contains no such evidence.
materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of
your repetitive and lengthy periods of UA, and your request for
discharge to avoid trial for these offenses.
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.
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.
application has been denied.

The Board believed

Further, the Board

Accordingly, your

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

2



Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 00828-01

    Original file (00828-01.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. 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. believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your requests for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved since, by this...

  • 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 | CY2007 | 08741-07

    Original file (08741-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, gitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. 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 28 February 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03027-10

    Original file (03027-10.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 & result, on 19 March 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court- martial for the three foregoing periods of UA totalling 376 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09339-07

    Original file (09339-07.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. 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 | CY2006 | 06895-06

    Original file (06895-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentaxy 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 24 April 1972 at age 17 and served for nearly two years without...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08125-01

    Original file (08125-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2001 | 07732-00

    Original file (07732-00.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 April 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. However, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the lengthy periods of UA and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 08046-03

    Original file (08046-03.rtf) 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.After c eful and coiscieitious consrtio of übe nti~ record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient4-uo establish the existence of probable materiai e or or iniust ice.iou enlisted in the Marne Corps on 28 June 1972 a age 17 End served for without disciplinary incident until 5...