Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01962-07
Original file (01962-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                                      2 NAVYANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100



 SMW
 Docket No: 1962-07
 7 September 2007





-


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 6 September 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.
On 25 July 1967, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. On 29 November 1967, you began an unauthorized absence (UA) that ended on 15 January 1968, a period of about 47 days. On 18 January 1968, you were convicted by a summary court-martial of the 47-day period of UA. On 12 March 1968, you began another UA that ended on 13 June 1968, a period of about 93 days. On 26 June 1968, you were convicted by a special court-martial of the 93-day period of UA.
On 18 December 1968, you began another UA. On 17 July 1970, you were apprehended by civil authorities and held pending charges. On 8 October 1970, the 659-day period of UA ended when you were returned to military authorities. On 6 November 1970, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the lengthy UA. At that time, you consulted with counsel and acknowledged the consequences of receiving such a discharge. On 17 November 1970, the separation authority approved your request for a UD. On 23 November 1970, you were separated with a UD for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial. 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.

The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth. The Board also considered your contention of recruiter misconduct and being told that you would still be entitled to some veteran’s benefits if you requested a UD for the good of the service. Nevertheless, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of service due to the seriousness of your misconduct, specifically, 799 total days of UA during the Vietnam conflict. 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. Regarding your contentions, there is no evidence in the record of recruiter misconduct and the record clearly shows that you acknowledged the adverse consequences of requesting a UD. Finally, the 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. 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 | CY2009 | 01298-09

    Original file (01298-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. , 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 of injustice. Your request for discharge was granted and on 19 December 1972, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01082-09

    Original file (01082-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 2009. 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 30 October 1970, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00605-08

    Original file (00605-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2008. On 12 October 1970, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for charges of unauthorized possession of a government .45 caliber weapon and assault with a knife by making a movement to cut another Marine. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05966-08

    Original file (05966-08.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 February 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08351-10

    Original file (08351-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 2011. 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 were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00317-08

    Original file (00317-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    dures applicable to the proceedings of ary material considered by the Board together with all material thereof, your naval record, and applicable , and policies. On 2 September 1970, you were separated with a UD |for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial. The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth and desire for a better discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08092-06

    Original file (08092-06.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 8 October 1969 at age 17. However, your request was denied and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04417-11

    Original file (04417-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09942-07

    Original file (09942-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2008. 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 | CY2011 | 05736-11

    Original file (05736-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2011. 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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 26 November 1971, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in...