DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL 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
T JR
Docket No: 4258-02
9 January 2003
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 January 2003. 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.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 September 1967 at the age
of 20. During the period from 20 December 1967 to 27 March 1968,
you underwent three psychiatric evaluations and were diagnosed
with anxiety neurosis and anxiety reaction with depression.
On 4 April 1968 you were convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of three periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 43
days, breaking restriction, and failure to obey a lawful order.
You were sentenced to confinement for four months and a $260
forfeiture of pay, a portion of which was suspended for six
months. However, on 5 June 1968, this suspended sentence was
vacated due to your continued misconduct.
On 16 May 1969 you were convicted of a 246 day period of UA. The
court sentenced you to confinement for six months and a bad
conduct discharge (BCD). However, the BCD and portions of the
confinement and forfeitures were suspended for six months.
On 9 June 1969 you began another period of UA that was not
terminated until 8 February 1970. Shortly thereafter, on 5 March
1970, you began yet another period of UA. During this period of
UA you were convicted by civil authorities of speeding and were
sentenced to a $51.25 fine. You were released from civil
confinement on 11 September 1970 but did not return to military
custody until 22 September 1970. On 12 October 1970 you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of the two foregoing
periods of UA totalling 445 days and breaking restriction. You
were sentenced to confinement for a month and a $85 forfeiture of
Pay
Subsequently, the suspended BCD was approved at all levels of
review. On 10 November 1970, due to your continued misconduct,
the suspension of the BCD was vacated and ordered executed. On
13 November 1970 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity, psychological problems, and your
contention that, upon enlistment, you were promised that you
would have an opportunity to play in a band in service clubs.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and contention
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of the serious nature of your misconduct,
specifically, your frequent and lengthy periods of UA. There is
no evidence in the record to support your contention, and you
have submitted no such evidence. 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
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06684-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2001. 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. A year later, on 12 April 1968, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 62 days and breaking...
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 | CY1999 | 01099-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09384-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. You received NJP on 22 February 1992 for a 17 period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 4 5 days and a $550 forfeiture of pay. However, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10272-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06601-01
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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07629-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. About two months later, on 22 March 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a f our day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10974-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2003. On 24 June 1968 you were convicted by SCM of a 15 day period of UA and sentenced to a $65 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 demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
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 | CY2001 | 08643-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. On 6 October 1977 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reasion of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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.