DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00

			TRG
	                                                 Docket No:9294-05 
 	2 March 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 28 February 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 for four years on 23 February 1966 at age 19. You then served in an excellent manner for three years. During this period you served in Vietnam and were promoted to sergeant. You were honorably discharged on 23 February 1969 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment after three years and one day of active service.

You reenlisted in the Marine Corps for six years on 24 February 1969 and were paid a reenlistment bonus. You then served without incident for over three years.

On 13 March 1972 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an absence from your appointed place of duty. Based on the NJP and your personal problems, the commanding officer requested that your promotion to staff sergeant (SSGT; E—6) be held in abeyance for six months. On 15 November 1972 action was initiated to evict your family from government quarters. About two weeks later, the commanding officer recommended that you be promoted to SSGT because your performance was above average.

On 18 December 1972 you began a period of unauthorized absence which lasted until you surrendered on 15 January 1972, a period of about 28 days. Later in January you were an unauthorized absentee for about one day. About this time you were charged with writing bad checks. Your military record shows that you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 29 days and 30 specifications of writing checks with intent to defraud. 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 8 March 1973 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 23 March 1973.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your six years of good service and documented marital problems. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterjzation 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. 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.

The Board believes that you are eligible for veterans benefits based on the completion of your four years of active service for which you were obligated in your first enlistment. Therefore, if you have been denied benefits, you should appeal that denial under procedures established by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

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