Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00566-01
Original file (00566-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

TRG
Docket No: 566-01
6 December 2001

Dear

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 4 December 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
Board.
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.

Your allegations of error and

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 on 1 May 1967 at age 18.
Subsequently, you served in Vietnam from 12 December 1967 to 5
August 1969.
volunteered for that service.
operations and were awarded the Combat Action Ribbon.

You served an extra six months because you

You participated in 10 combat

you reported to the Marine Barracks,  

Rodman,

Your

On 30 April 1970 you were awarded a Good Conduct

During the period 10 July 1970 to 23 November 1970 you

On  3 December 1969,
Canal Zone, for duty.
On 9 April 1970 you received nonjudicial
punishment for treating a noncommissioned officer with contempt
and disrespect.
Medal.
received nonjudicial punishment on three occasions.
offenses were two instances of failure to go to your appointed
place of duty, communicating a threat to a sentry, destruction of
a screen valued at $15,
officer with contempt and disrespect.
September 1970, you were counseled and warned that further
misconduct could lead to processing for an undesirable discharge.

and treating a senior noncommissioned

During this period, on 3

Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an
administrative discharge.

In connection with this processing you

elected to waive your right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board.
your fifth nonjudicial punishment for disobedience and
discreditable actions detrimental to the Marine Corps.
Subsequently, the discharge authority approved the recommendation
of your commanding officer that you be discharged for misconduct
with a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

On 25 January 1971 you received

and the almost three years of good

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, 18 months of
combat service in Vietnam,
service prior to your first disciplinary action.
Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your record of five
nonjudicial punishments, especially the two punishments, that
occurred after you were warned of the consequences of further
misconduct, one of which took place while you were being
processed for an  
you have provided no explanation of your conduct while you were
stationed in the Canal Zone and have not provided any evidence of
good post service conduct.
The Board concluded that the
discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

However, the

administrati,ve  discharge.

The Board noted that

Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

The names and

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

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02128-00

    Original file (02128-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When the fraud was discovered you were processed for an You were issued an undesirable The records you submitted show that on 10 July 2001, the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, Missouri issued you certification of military service which shows that you served in the Marine Corps from 29 April 1967 until you were issued an honorable discharge on 20 June 1970. of this document is unknown since the available records clearly show that you received a bad conduct discharge on 23...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00142-06

    Original file (00142-06.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 July 1967 at age 17. After returning to the United States,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12

    Original file (01145 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010229

    Original file (20060010229.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant essentially states that his DD Form 214 that was issued at the time of his discharge and immediate reenlistment does not list his dates of service for his first tour in Vietnam, and states that the dates of service for his first tour in Vietnam were from April 1966 to April 1967. Therefore, he is only entitled to partial relief by correcting his DD Form 214 that was issued...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004155

    Original file (20140004155.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was issued a bad conduct discharge on 8 June 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11, as a result of a court-martial. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable or a general discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06830-00

    Original file (06830-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and .of the Board for Correction of Naval execctive session, considered your A three-member panel Records, sitting in application on 5 June injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative procedures applicable to the proceedings of this regulations and Board. w13re notified of separation processing due ci*ril authorities of tampering with an On 20 October 1969 you to your conviction by automobile and the you were convicted by and were sentenced...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00279-99

    Original file (00279-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Subsequently, you served in Vietnam from 13 March During this period, on 16 May 1968, you During the next 11 months you received Your offenses were The court sentenced you to reduction to pay grade E-l, On 29 September 1969 you were convicted by a special martial of two periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 124 days. found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your multiple The Board noted and lengthy periods of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01274-03

    Original file (01274-03.rtf) 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 2003. 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 | CY2003 | 08724-03

    Original file (08724-03.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 16 August 1965. On 18 August 1970, you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04688-08

    Original file (04688-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...