DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
ANNEX
NAVY
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
S
TJR
Docket No: 8479-01
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
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.
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 Navy on 9 June 1966 at the
age of 18.
Approximately seven months later, on 19 January 1967,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an eight day period
of unauthorized absence
extra duty for seven days and a $23.45 forfeiture of pay.
On 7
April 1967 you received NJP for a seven day period of UA and were
awarded a $48 forfeiture of pay and reduction to
(UA) and were awarded restriction and
paygrade E-l.
Your record contains two citations which reflect that you were
awarded the Navy Commendation Medal (NCM) with Combat
Navy Achievement Medal (NAM) with Combat
and meritorious achievement in 1967 while serving in Vietnam.
"VI' for heroic action
"VW' and the
Your record reflects that on 16 September 1968 you were convicted
by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 32 day period of UA and were
sentenced to a $212 forfeiture of pay and hard labor for a month.
During the period from 5 March to 15 September 1969 you received
NJP on three more occasions for wrongful appropriation of another
persons property, breaking restriction, and absence from your
On 29 October 1969, after undergoing a
appointed place of duty.
psychiatric examination, you were diagnosed with a schizoid
personality and recommended for an administrative separation. On
31 October 1969 you received your sixth NJP for three periods of
UA totalling four days,
absence from your appointed place of
duty, feigning illness, and dishonorable indebtedness.
The
punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for 30 days.
the diagnosed schizoid personality.
On 3 November 1969 you were notified of pending separation action
by reason of unsuitability due to a character and behavior
disorder, specifically,
Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended separation by
reason of unsuitability.
The commanding officer's recommendation
NJPs and SPCM, and stated that your military
also noted your six
behavior was well below acceptable limits, but failed to mention
the awards of the NCM and NAM.
On 12 November 1969 the discharge
authority directed separation with characterization of service as
warranted by your service record.
On 18 November 1969 you were
issued a general discharge by reason of unsuitability.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall
trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during
periodic evaluations.
of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for
a fully honorable characterization of service.
Your conduct average was 2.90.
An average
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity, Vietnam service, the two personal
decorations, and the Department of Veterans Affairs rating
decision which reflects that you are now receiving treatment for
post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
your contention that since you honorably served your country in
Vietnam and in the United States,
upgraded to honorable.
factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in six
conviction, and since your conduct average was insufficiently
high to warrant an honorable discharge.
circumstances in your case the Board concluded your discharge was
proper as issued and no change is warranted.
Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
your discharge should be
However, the Board concluded these
NJPs and a court-martial
The Board also considered
Given all the
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 | CY1998 | NC9806956
The citation accompanying this award reads, in part, as follows: For meritorious service while serving as Weapons Officer in (CRAIG) while operating in combat missions supporting the Republic of Vietnam from 10 April to 10 August 1965... CRAIG was assigned duties as commander of the Vietnam Naval Gunfire Support Unit from its inception until the ship’s departure from the area. At this time, the Navy and Marine Corps Awards Manual, SECNAV Instruction (SECNAVINST) P1650.1C, authorized the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05670-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 15 April 2008. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02838-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TJIR Docket No: 2838-07 24 January 2008 A three-member panel of the Boa Records, sitting in executive session, application on 23 January 2008. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative rd for Correction of Naval considered your Your allegations of error and regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Subsequently, you were notified of pending...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01274-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05019-01
Your record reflects that on 22 September 1969 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a 25 day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction for 14 days and a seven day forfeiture of pay. On 14 May 1973 you received an On 29 The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, limited education, low test scores, The Board further considered your and Vietnam service. ...
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 | 10210-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. Subsequently, you were notified of pending separation action by reason of unsuitability due to the diagnosed personality disorder. 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 | 03539-01
You were again advanced to PFC and On 9 June 1969 you were The DD Form 214 shows that you had three periods of lost time, UA from 10 February to 10 March 1967 and two periods of confinement from 11 April to 12 June and 22 October to 21 December 1967. for entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal commenced on 26 October 1967, the day after your summary court-martial conviction. The DD Form 214 also indicates that eligibility Regulations provided that individuals discharged for the convenience of...
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 | CY2009 | 08827-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 June 2010. 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...