DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 8399-02
27 February 2003
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 5 February 2003. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 July 1966. The
record reflects that you received nonjudicial punishment and were convicted
by two special courts—martial. The offenses included unauthorized absences
totalling 241 days.
on 27 Aug 1970 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge
in order to avoid trial by court—martial for an unauthorized absence from
10 May to 28 July 1970, a period of 78 days. 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. Your request was granted and, 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. You received the undesirable discharge on 21 October 1970.
On 10 June 1977 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) changed the
characterization of the discharge to general under the
provisions of the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP). However, on 20
July 1978 NDRB declined to confirm the general discharge under its uniform
discharge review standards, thus denying you veterans’ benefits.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity. However,
the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your request for discharge to
avoid trial for an unauthorized absence of more than two months, and your
unauthorized absences totalling eight months. 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 when your request for discharge was granted and should not be
permitted to change it now. Therefore, the Board believed that the relief
granted by the NDRB, in accordance with the provisions of the SDRP, is more
than sufficient in your case. 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3686 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. On 20 June 1977 a panel of the Naval Discharge Review Board {NDRB}, convened under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP) and upgraded your undesirable discharge to general under honorable conditions. the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00611-99
Your military record shows that on 30 July 1971 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of unauthorized absence Your record also shows that prior to totalling 44 days. On 20 September 1977 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) changed the characterization of the discharge to general under the provisions of the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06670-01
Your military record shows that on 23 April 1971 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for this 239 day period of unauthorized absence. requesting that original DD Form 214 issued on 2 June 1971 and the information on the SDRP 214 be corrected by removing all entries showing that you originally received an undesirable discharge. were not sufficient to warrant further recharacterization of your discharge or a confirmation of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04395-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 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. The Board found that your request was granted on 8 On 5 July 1977 your discharge was upgraded to general under the provisions of the Special Discharge Review...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2151-13
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. On 29 July 1970, you submitted a written request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of UA totaling 181 days. Your request for discharge was granted and on 11 August 1970, you received an undesirable discharge for the good of the service in lieu...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05434-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your military record shows that on 10 February 1970 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for an unauthorized absence of nine days, two instances of willful disobedience of a lawful order, two instances of disrespect, theft of a jeep, assault, and possession of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01211-01
Your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 25 July 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, you continued to serve and were advanced to LCPL You reported to duty in Vietnam on 5 October 1968. On 28 August 1970 the discharge authority directed You were Prior to submitting this request court- The record further reflects that on 20 June 1977 the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06277-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Your allegations of error and After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 03714-00
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. Pursuant to reference (a) a review of enclosure (1) was conducted to form opinions about the subject petitioner's claims that he suffered fiom Post Traumatic Stress Disorder at the time of his service and that this was a significant contributing factor to the misconduct that lead to his discharge. The misconduct that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07600-02
10 of the A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 23 January 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were awarded confinement at hard labor paygrade E-2, and forfeitures of On 23 March 1971, you commenced a second period of authorized absence that did not terminate until you were apprehended by civilian...