DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMW
Docket No: 10084-07
19 June 2008
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 18 June 2008. 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 1 October 1971, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. During
the period 13 November 1972 to 15 January 1973, you were in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status on two occasions totaling 56
days. On 14 February 1973, you requested an undesirable
discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by
court-martial for these offenses. At that time, you consulted
with counsel and acknowledged the consequences of receiving
such a discharge. On 7 March 1973, the separation authority
approved your request for a UD. On 9 March 1973, 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
considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due
to the seriousness of your misconduct. Furthermore, the Board
believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when
your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was
approved. The Board also concluded that you received the
benefit of your bargain with the Navy 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10150-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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. On 5 October 1973, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the 134 day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02176-08
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. You subsequently requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the three periods of UA totaling 115 days. The Board also considered your contention that you contracted hepatitis C while in the Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07848-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. On 5 January 1973, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further infractions could result in administrative separation.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10393-07
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 also 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04345-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. On 11 February 1974, you requested an UD for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA that totaled 141 days.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04636-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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 | CY2007 | 05595-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 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. 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 | CY2007 | 07473-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01244-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 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. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10389-09
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. On 5 February 1975, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to...