Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03821-02
Original file (03821-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAVY 

ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TJR
Docket No: 3821-02
6 December 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 3 December 2002.
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 September 1972 at the age
of 17.
court-
martial 
(UA).
 
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two and a
half months and a $600 forfeiture of pay.

On 12 December 1973 you were convicted by special  
(SPCM) of a 160 day period of unauthorized absence

On 26 February 1974 you received nonjudicial punishment
a one day period of UA and were awarded restriction for 30 days.
On 2 May 1974 you were convicted by SPCM of four specifications
of failure to go to your appointed place of duty, failure to obey
a lawful order, and making a false official statement.
sentenced to reduction to  
for two months, and an $800 forfeiture of pay, half of which was
suspended for 12 months.

You were
paygrade  E-l, confinement at hard labor

(NJP) for

 

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of unfitness.
waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present
your case to an administrative discharge board.
On 22 May 1974
your commanding officer recommended you be issued an undesirable

At that time you

discharge by reason of unfitness.
authority approved this recommendation,
of the discharge for six months.

On 23 June 1974 the discharge
but suspended execution

During the period from 17 July to 19 August 1974 you were absent
from your appointed place of duty on one occasion, and in a UA
status on two occasions for a total of 30 days.
1975 your commanding officer recommended that the suspended
discharge awarded on 23 June 1974 be vacated due to your
continued misconduct.
This recommendation was approved, and on
23 September 1974 the discharge authority directed an other than
honorable discharge.
discharged.

On 27 September 1974 you were so

On 12 September

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and your contention that you did not
contest your discharge because you did not know that you could.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded recharacterization of your
discharge was not warranted because of your repetitive misconduct
which resulted in NJP and two court-martial convictions, one of
which was for a lengthy period of UA.
your discharge was suspended,
earn a better characterization of service, but you failed to do
so and committed further offenses.
has been denied.

The Board also noted that
thus giving you the opportunity to

Accordingly, your application

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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10990-10

    Original file (10990-10.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. On 22 July 1974 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a 61 day period of UA and sentenced to a $216 forfeiture of pay and confinement at hard labor for 30 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00847-05

    Original file (00847-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1552.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2005. 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 | CY2006 | 01172-07

    Original file (01172-07.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 23 May 1972 at age 18. On 19 September 1973 you were again...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11117-07

    Original file (11117-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04465-01

    Original file (04465-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 November 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. The record does not indicate if any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA. good post service conduct, and your However, the Board concluded these...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06645-01

    Original file (06645-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY BO ARD FOR CORRE CT ION OF N AV AL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TJR Docket No: 6645-0 1 13 May 200 2 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. sitting in executive session, considered your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, application on 7 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10197-02

    Original file (10197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. imposed was reduction to On 11 March and again on 5 May 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling three days and breaking restriction. January 1961 the discharge authority then directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09154-04

    Original file (09154-04.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 13 July 1970 at age 17 and served for a year without disciplinary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10669-10

    Original file (10669-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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. April 1961, you were convicted by a SCM of being UA for one day.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10463-02

    Original file (10463-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 19 January 1973 you were convicted by SPCM of two periods of UA totalling three days, You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for two months, a $300 forfeiture of pay, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On...