DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TJR
Docket No: 7708-01
10 May 2002
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 7 May 2002. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 20 September
1971 at the age of 17. Your record reflects that on 11 March
1972 you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA). On 25 May
1972, while in a UA status, you were convicted by civil
authorities of operating an automobile without permission and
were sentenced to probation for a year. Shortly thereafter, on
11 June 1972, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 76
day period of UA and disrespect. The punishment imposed was
reduction to paygrade E-1, a $100 forfeiture of pay, and
restriction for 60 days, half of which was suspended for three
months.
Your record further reflects that on 22 January 1973 you were
convicted by civil authorities of being in the presence of
dangerous drugs and were sentenced to probation for a year.
Approximately a month later, on 21 February 1973, you received
NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty. The
punishment imposed was restriction for 14 days and a $50
forfeiture of pay, which was suspended for three months.
On 10 April 1973 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of unfitness due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military and civilian
authorities. At that time you waived your rights to consult with
legal counsel, present your case to an administrative discharge
board, and to submit a statement in rebuttal to the discharge.
On 18 April 1973 your commanding officer recommended an
undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. On 11 May 1973 the
discharge authority approved the foregoing recommendation and
directed an undesirable discharge, and on 25 May 1973 you were so
discharged. At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth
and immaturity, post service conduct, and character reference
letters. The Board also considered your contentions that your
ability to serve was impaired by alcohol and drug abuse, and that
your discharge was too severe when compared with today's
standards. However, the Board found these factors and contentions
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge or a change of your narrative reason for separation or
reenlistment code given your repetitive misconduct in both the
military and civilian communities. Given all the circumstances
of your case, the Board concluded your discharge, narrative
reason for separation, and reenlistment code were proper 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 .
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
p r e r 1 : m n t i o n of r e g u l - a r i t.v 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 PFE IFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00632-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. 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. CNP further directed that you be advised that you were being placed in a probationary status for a period of 12 months and that the CO was authorized to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06606-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. 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 | CY2001 | 00327-01
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, during the seven month period from March 1973 to October 1973 you received four nonjudicial punishments ( N J P ) and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10329-02
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 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07460-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 1999. 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. Given all the circumstances of your case the.Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07464-98
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 24 October 1973 you submitted a written request for immediate execution of the BCD. veterans1 benefits after being discharged with a BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08725-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2002. He stated that he had been taking lfyellow jackets" since being in the navy for 3-1/2 years. On 23 July 1954 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01128-99
A three-raember panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. The punishment imposed was forfeitures totalling $75 and restriction for 10 days. However, t h e Board found the evidence and materials submitted w e r e n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o warrant r e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f your d i s c h a r g e given t h e s e r i o u s n a t u r e o f your f r e q u e n t misconduct, which r e s u l t e d...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07148-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2002. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06969-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. 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...