Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06326-06
Original file (06326-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
         /        WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


         TJR
 Docket No: 6326-06
          16       March    2007







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 13 March 2007. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 21 December 1972 at age 17. During the period from 22 April to 14 June 1973 you received nonjudicial punishment on two occasions for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 48 days.
On 6 July 1973 you began a period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 11 October 1973. At that time you were placed on restriction. However, two day later, on 13 October 1973, you began another period of UA that was not terminated until 15 January 1974. As a result, on 12 February 1974, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing two periods of UA totalling 191 days and breaking restriction. Prior to submitting this request for discharge, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised of your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted, and on 6 March 1974 you received an undesirable discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. As a result, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and assertion that your periods of UA resulted from the Marine Corps’ failure to train you as a meat cutter. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequently and lengthy periods of UA which also resulted in your request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was approved since, by this action, you escaped the possibility of confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and should not be permitted to change it now. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, to support your assertion. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01155-07

    Original file (01155-07.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 30 July 1973 at age 17. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05238-08

    Original file (05238-08.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 | 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 | CY2005 | 00847-05

    Original file (00847-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2005. 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 | CY2002 | 05233-01

    Original file (05233-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04729-00

    Original file (04729-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 01378-01

    Original file (01378-01.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. 1973 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 75 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months and a $400 forfeiture of pay. discharged.

  • 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 | 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 | 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.