DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203704100
TJR
Docket No: 2045-00
25 August 2000
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 15 August 2000.
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.
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 25 August
Your record reflects that on 25 March
1981 at the age of 17.
1982 you received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for a five day
period of unauthorized absence
extra duty and restriction for 45 days, a portion of which was
suspended, and a $400 forfeiture of pay.
received NJP for two specifications failure to go to your
appointed place of duty.
forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 45 days. A
portion of the restriction and extra duty was suspended.
The punishment imposed was a $300
On 26 April 1982 you
WA).
The punishment imposed was
Your record further reflects that during the period from 2 May to
14 July 1982 you were in a UA status on three occasions for a
total of 62 days.
UA.
awarded at your NJP was vacated due to your continued misconduct.
On 22 September 1982 you terminated a 64 day period of UA.
On 22 July 1982 the suspended restriction and extra duty
On 20 July 1982 you began another period of
Subsequently, it appears that you submitted a written request for
an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
It is
for four foregoing periods of UA totalling 126 days.
presumed 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.
granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an
other than honorable discharge by reason of the good of the
service.
of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a
punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.
September 1982 you were so discharged.
As a result of this action, you were spared the stigma
Your request was subsequently
On 29
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth
and immaturity, good post service conduct, and your contention
that you would like your discharge upgraded.
found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your frequent
and lengthy periods of UA and your request for discharge to avoid
trial.
extended to you when your request for an undesirable discharge
was approved since, by this action,
Further,
of confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge.
the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain
with the Marine Corps when your request for a clemency discharge
was granted and should not be permitted to change your discharge
now.
The Board believed that considerable clemency was
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
However, the Board
you escaped the possibility
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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director
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 | CY2001 | 01878-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 August 2000. 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. 1982 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10961-02
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequent misconduct, which resulted in five NJPs and your lengthy period of UA which resulted in your request for discharge. Consequently, when applying...
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 | 06320-01
request for discharge was granted and your commanding officer was directed to issue you an undesirable discharge. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you On 10 March 1972 The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, service in Vietnam, and your contention that because of your personality disorder you could not adjust to duty in the United States after your tour of Vietnam. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04729-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 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. On 30 May The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04596-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 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. January 1968 you received NJP for a 14 day period of UA and were awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay. Given the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03764-01
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& appointed place of duty On 25 October 1983 vou received was On 15 November 1983 the BCD was to be executed, Subsequently, the suspension of the forfeitures and BCD were vacated. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden‘is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01386-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 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. However, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07938-98
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...