DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 RDZ:ecb
Docket No. 08331-08
19 February 2009
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 10 February 2009. 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 for two years on 30 July 1973
at age 26. Unfortunately you served for only a little over nine
months when you received an undesirable discharge (UD) in lieu
of trial by court-martial pursuant to your request.
Specifically you requested a UD in order to avoid being court-
martialed for the following offenses: (1) Communicating a
threat to two commissioned officers and a noncommissioned
officer by saying on or about 22 March 1974, “I'm going to get a
.45 pistol and shoot the three of you.” (2) Using disrespectful
language to a commissioned officer on or about 22 March 1974 by
calling him a “Jive Fucker.” (3) Disobeying a lawful order of a
noncommissioned officer on or about 27 February 1974 (4) Being
disrespectful in language on or about 27 February 1974 by saying
‘Fuck it, I am not going to run.” (5) Assaulting a
noncommissioned officer on or about 27 February 1974 by pushing
him with your hands. In your written request for a UD, which
you submitted after you conferred with a military lawyer who was
assigned to represent you, you stated that you didn’t like to
take orders and were not suited to the Marine Corps. Your
request for a discharge was granted and you thereby avoided the
risk of being convicted by court-martial and sentenced to a
substantial period of confinement at hard labor and a bad
conduct discharge.
In view of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct the
Board concluded that your discharge was proper as issued and
should not be changed now as a matter of clemency. In this
regard the Board believed that considerable clemency was shown
to you when your request for discharge was granted. Finally,
the Board noted that the events of 22 March and 27 February were
not your first disciplinary actions. On 20 and 21 November 1973
you were charged with being disrespectful to a commissioned
officer, two noncommissioned officers and loitering on post. As
in the case of your later misconduct you submitted a request for
a UD to avoid trial by court-martial which was disapproved
shortly before you committed the offenses that resulted in your
issuance of a UD.
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,
Ls
a Q
W. DEAN PFARAFRES
Executive Diteh
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09065-10
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 28 February 1974, you received NUP for a seven day UA period. 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 | CY2011 | 00132-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, reguiations, and policies. On 20 February 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07199-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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 18 June 1974, you received an OTH discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
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 | CY2009 | 12082-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | 10740-07
A three-member panel jof the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in dxecutive session, considered your application on 20 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. 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 04511-08
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 12 May 1976, you requested an undesirable discharge (UD) for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11021-07
A three-member panel jof the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 2008. After careful and congpcientious 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 | CY2008 | 08996-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2009. Unfortunately you only served a little less than two years and were discharged, pursuant to your request, to avoid trial by court-martial for 159 days of unauthorized absence (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.