Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 09724-03
Original file (09724-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
 Docket No: 9724-03
28 July 2004

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the 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 20 July 2004. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 3 May 1962 at age 1 9 . During l96~ you received n onjudicial punishment on three occasions . Your of de fenses were offenses were a short period of unauthorized absence, gambling and dereliction of duty.
On 1 February 1965 you began a period of unauthorized absence that lasted until you were apprehended on 27 January 1966. A general court-martial convened on 13 April 1966 and convicted you of the foregoing period of unauthorized absence totaling about 360 days. The court sentenced you as mitigated to reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $60 pay per month for six months and confinement at hard labor for six months. You were restored to duty from confinement on 12 September 1966.
Your command then discovered that your increasing indebtedness totaled more than $5,000, and that your creditors would soon start legal action. On 29 December 1966 you were notified of separation processing by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board. After review, the discharge authority directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness and you were so discharged on 16 January 1967.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and difficulties coping with personal and family problems. However, the Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your disciplinary record and your serious indebtedness problems. The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when you were restored to duty after a conviction by a general court-martial for about 360 days of unauthorized absence. Any further problems after that date properly resulted in discharge processing. The Board concluded that the undesirable discharge was proper as issued 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 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
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08251-06

    Original file (08251-06.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 5 May 1966. After review by the discharge...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00347-99

    Original file (00347-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months, forfeitures of $55 per month for four months and a bad conduct discharge. Thereafter, the commanding officer recommended an You were so discharged on An enlisted The Chief of Naval The board concluded The Board noted your contentions that you had an NJPs and convictions by four summary courts-martial and a In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03204-02

    Original file (03204-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 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. Subsequently, there was a two day period of Prier to A special court-martial convened on 10 April 1961 and convicted you of two periods of unauthorized absence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06514-08

    Original file (06514-08.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 May 2009. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your general discharge because of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2009. 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 | CY2008 | 01178-09

    Original file (01178-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2009. 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 | 04596-00

    Original file (04596-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 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. January 1968 you received NJP for a 14 day period of UA and were awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay. Given the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09294-05

    Original file (09294-05.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps for four years on 23 February 1966 at age 19. Your military...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06284-02

    Original file (06284-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. A special court-martial convened on 19 January 1968 and convicted you of an unauthorized absence of about 61 days. However, it does not change the facts of the underlying The Board concluded that the discharge was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01130-99

    Original file (01130-99.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 June 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...