DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
S
TJR
Docket No: 5794-02
28 August 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 27 August 2002.
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 8 July 1966 at the age of 21.
You served without disciplinary incident until 26 September 1967
when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go
to your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $14 forfeiture
About a month later, on 21
of pay and extra duty for 14 days.
October 1967, you received NJP for failure to maintain proper
surveillance as a sentinel and absence from your appointed place
The punishment imposed was a $90 forfeiture of pay and
of duty.
reduction to
your third NJP for failure to obey a lawful order and were
awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay,
months, and confinement on bread and water for three days.
On 19 December 1967 you received
which was suspended for two
paygrade E-l.
On 28 May 1968 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM)
of disobedience and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for
two months.
During the period from 9 September to 18 November
1968 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status on two
occasions for a total of 50 days.
On 13 March 1969 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of unfitness due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
At that time you waived your rights to consult with legal counsel
and to present your case to an administrative discharge board.
Your commanding officer stated in his recommendation for
discharge the separation processing had been delayed due to an
investigation regarding the foregoing two periods of UA and a
charge of theft, in which you confessed that you had stole a tape
recorder and other articles from a privately owned vehicle. On
24 March 1969 a staff judge advocate noted that even though you
were awarded a SPCM for theft,
the execution of your discharge
was delayed due to the fact that the victim had been discharged
due to lack of a speedy trial.
directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities, and on 26 March 1969 you were so discharged.
The discharge authority then
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity, service in Vietnam, and your
contention that your misconduct was due to your addiction to
heroin and marital problems.
these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of
misconduct, which resulted in three
special court-martial, in addition to the 50 days of UA and
larceny for which no action was taken.
application has been denied.
your*discharge because of your repetitive
Nevertheless, the Board concluded
NJPs and a conviction by
Accordingly, your
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 | CY2002 | 10232-02
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 31 August and again on 28 December 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two occasions for a total of two days of unauthorized absence (UA). As a result of this misconduct, that the previously approved undesirable discharge be executed, and on 3 January 1969 you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05868-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 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. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04904-06
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 Navy on 22 March 1966 at age 19. Although no disciplinary action was taken for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02044-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 August 2000. 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. on 9 March 1969, you were On 15 December 1969 you received NJP for a two pay period punishment imposed was restriction for seven days and You were sentenced...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05167-03
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 Navy on 24 June 1969 at age 19. Subsequently, the discharge authority directed a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11339-07
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 15 November 1968 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of UA totalling 64 days and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for three months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07490-09
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. The record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this 56 day period of UA. 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 | CY2006 | 05719-06
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 Navy on 27 October 1966 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02772-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. for 14 days and a $20 forfeiture of pay. 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 | CY2001 | 02231-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 September 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Given all the...