Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07185-06
Original file (07185-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370~5 100
TRG
                                                                                 Docket No: 7185-06
                                                                                 19 September 2006



This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 29 August 2006. 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.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 April 1999 at age 27 with prior service in the National Guard. During the period from 7 September 1999 to 24 January 2000 you were an unauthorized absentee on two occasions totaling about 135 days.
Your military record shows that you submitted a written request for a discharge under other than honorable conditions in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the 135 days of unauthorized absences. Your record also 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. The Board found that your request was granted on 30 March 2000 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 were discharged on 6 April 2000.




In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior service in the
 National Guard and your desire to again serve in the military. The Board also considered your contention that there was an unspecified problem with your test scores you received during enlistment processing which made your enlistment invalid. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of misconduct and especially your request for discharge to avoid trial for the offenses. 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 you should not be permitted to change it now. Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you have submitted none, to support your contention. The Board concluded that your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07351-06

    Original file (07351-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Nevertheless, the Board found 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 three months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01217-00

    Original file (01217-00.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. 1971 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 of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08299-98

    Original file (08299-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction Of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Your allegations of error and application on 26 May 1999. 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. considerable clemency was extended to you when your request to avoid trial by court-martial was approved since by this action, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06415-99

    Original file (06415-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support Your allegations of error and 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. not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of misconduct and especially your request for discharge to avoid trial for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07430-97

    Original file (07430-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings 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. The Board found that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06583-02

    Original file (06583-02.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 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01878-00

    Original file (01878-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY1999 | 00646-99

    Original file (00646-99.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 July 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 08138-04

    Original file (08138-04.doc) 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 2005. However, the Board concluded 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 about 17 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06648-05

    Original file (06648-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2006. 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 concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your request for discharge to...