Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06690-99
Original file (06690-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
Y
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 203704100

CRS
Docket No: 6690-99
8 June 2000

Dear

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 17 May 2000.
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.

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.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 6
December 1966 at age 17.
two nonjudicial punishments.
unauthorized absence of seven days, underage drinking, and being
incapacitated for duty.

The record reflects that you received

The offenses included an

On 20 January 1969 you were convicted by a general court-martial
of conspiracy to commit larceny of government property worth
$1129, stealing that property, and stealing a government truck.
The sentence imposed consisted of confinement at hard labor for
two years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction in
rank and a bad conduct discharge.
convicted by a second court-martial of an unauthorized absence of
four days and escaping from confinement.
Subsequently, the bad
conduct discharge was ordered executed.
You were discharged on
18 November 1969.

On 15 May 1969 you were

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors,

such as your contention that post

traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) caused your misconduct.
However, the Board concluded that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to
In this regard,
the frequency and seriousness of your offenses.
the Board especially noted the serious nature of the offenses
involving the theft of government property.
evidence in the record, and you have submitted none, to show that
you suffered from PTSD at the time of your service.
Additionally, even if you did, and it became symptomatic during
your period of active duty,
disorder caused an inability to know right from wrong or adhere
to the right, or that your PTSD was sufficiently mitigating to
warrant recharacterization.
Accordingly, your application has
been denied.
will be furnished upon request.

The names and votes of the members of the panel

Further, there is no

there is no indication that the

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

copy to:

Veterans of Foreign Wars

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR13277 14

    Original file (NR13277 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. “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 | CY2014 | NR13277 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR13277 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member’ panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, ‘considered your application on 6 January 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2002 | 02562-02

    Original file (02562-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 22 June 1973 the commanding officer recommended that he be The record reflects that on 14 July 1969 he On 4 February 1970 he was evacuated On 21 September 1972 he was The court sentenced him to five years separated with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09290-10

    Original file (09290-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 May 2011. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. 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 | CY2014 | NR2340 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR2340 14_Redacted.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 March 2015. 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. As a result, on 2 February 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2340 14

    Original file (NR2340 14.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 March 2015. 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. As a result, on 2 February 1973, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05758-02

    Original file (05758-02.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. In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, combat record in Vietnam, and the contention that you suffered from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the Board found that these factors were not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 03714-00

    Original file (03714-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Pursuant to reference (a) a review of enclosure (1) was conducted to form opinions about the subject petitioner's claims that he suffered fiom Post Traumatic Stress Disorder at the time of his service and that this was a significant contributing factor to the misconduct that lead to his discharge. The misconduct that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00710-11

    Original file (00710-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 2011. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. 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 | CY2007 | 06363-07

    Original file (06363-07.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 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 15 November 1968. Your request was...