Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00317-08
Original file (00317-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ee

This is in reference
naval record pursuant
United States Code, ¢

A three-member panel
Records, sitting in 4

application on 20 August 2008.

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

SMS
Docket No: 317-08
21 August 2008

to your application for correction of your
to the provisions of title 10 of the

ection 1552.

of the Board for Correction of Naval

xecutive session, considered your
Your allegations of error and

injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative

regulations and proca
this Board. Document

consisted of your application,

submitted in support
statutes, regulations

After careful and con
record, the Board fou
to establish the exis
injustice.

On 12 April 1968, you
21. On 5 September 1
service record to the
you were admitted to
medical care. On 16
hospital and temporar
Lakes. On 21 Novembe

court-martial of faill

and larceny.
report to the Staging

22 March 1969,
failed to comply with

apprehended after being in a UA status for about 500 days.

dures applicable to the proceedings of
ary material considered by the Board
together with all material
thereof, your naval record, and applicable
, and policies.

scientious consideration of the entire

nd the evidence submitted was insufficient

tence of probable material error or

enlisted in the Marine Corps at age

p68, you were administratively joined by
Staging Battalion, Camp Pendleton after
the Naval Hospital, Great Lakes for
september 1968, you were released from the
tly attached to a local command at Great

¥ 1968, you were convicted by a summary
Ire to go to your appointed place of duty

On 18 February 1969, you were issued orders to
Battalion, Camp Pendleton. On

you began an unauthorized absence (UA) when you
the orders. On 4 August 1970, you were

On

20 August 1970, you rdquested an undesirable discharge (UD) for

the good of the servia

500 day period of UA.

e to avoid trial by court-martial for the
At that time, you consulted with counsel

and acknowledged the donsequences of receiving such a
discharge. On 27 August 1970, the separation authority
approved your request for a UD. On 2 September 1970, you were
separated with a UD |for the good of the service to avoid trial
by court-martial. Als a result of this action, you were spared
the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential
penalties of a punitlive discharge and confinement at hard

labor.

The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
considered all potential mitigation, such as your youth and
desire for a better discharge. 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 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 Ithe circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to
have the Board recongider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered
by the Board. [In thils regard, it is important to keep in mind
that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequentilly, 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,

Ra PD

Fru_w. DEAN PFRIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04910-08

    Original file (04910-08.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. 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 | CY2007 | 01962-07

    Original file (01962-07.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.On 25 July 1967, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. On 17 November 1970, the separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04082-11

    Original file (04082-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2012. On 12 May 1970, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the forgoing periods of UA. 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 | CY2009 | 02720-09

    Original file (02720-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 07383-99

    Original file (07383-99.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. However, The record reflects that on 25 April 1968, while you were UA, your mother sent a telegram to her congressman to the effect that you had returned from Vietnam in June 1967 after serving for 14 months, and that the Marine Corps was trying to send you back. Although the clemency...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10683-07

    Original file (10683-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 June 1967, while on ‘probation, you began a UA that ended about 187 days later when you surrendered. On 9 February 1968, the suspended sentence was vacated and the BCD was ordered executed. On 16 February 1968, you were discharged with a BCD.

  • 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 | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00995

    Original file (ND99-00995.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In response to applicant’s issue 1, a medical diagnosis on active duty or during post-service, and whether proper or improper, is not an issue upon which this Board can grant relief. The applicant

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10683-07

    Original file (10683-07.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.On 19 January 1966, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 20. On 19 July 1966, you began an...