Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07732-00
Original file (07732-00.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: 7732-00
11 April 2001

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 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.
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.

Your record reflects that you served for

The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 October
1971 at the age of 19.
nearly a year without disciplinary incident.
September 1972 you began a 203 day period of unauthorized absence
(UA) that was not terminated until you  were apprehended on 29
Approximately four months later, on 2 July 1973, you
March 1973.
began a 848 day period of UA that was not terminated until you
were apprehended on 29 October 1975.
deserter during both of these periods of UA.

However, on 6

You were declared a

Subsequently, on 22 January 1976, you submitted a written request
for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-
Your
martial for the two periods of UA totalling 1,051 days.
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.
commanding officer was directed to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of the good of the service. As a
result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-

Your request was granted and your

martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive
discharge and confinement at hard labor. On 9 February 1976 you
were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth
The Board also considered your contention that
and immaturity.
your periods of UA were due to your unavoidable family problems.
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 your request for
discharge to avoid trial for these periods of UA.
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,
confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge.
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.
noted that there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted
none, to support your contention.
has been denied.

you escaped the possibility of

Accordingly, your application

Further, the

The Board also

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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00909-02

    Original file (00909-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. day period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended on 29 September 1976. submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA totalling...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00752-12

    Original file (00752-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. 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. In this regard, on 21 July 1976, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial...

  • 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 | 01220-00

    Original file (01220-00.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. 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 | 04126-01

    Original file (04126-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 TJR Docket No: 4126-01 21 November 2001 Dear w 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 14 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10366-02

    Original file (10366-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00275-10

    Original file (00275-10.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 September 2010. 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. During the period from 26 to 29 November 1974 you were again in a UA status for three days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09640-04

    Original file (09640-04.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 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 3 January 1973 at age 18. However, the record does not reflect...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10677-09

    Original file (10677-09.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00951-02

    Original file (00951-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. administrative or disciplinary action was taken for these periods of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...