Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09154-04
Original file (09154-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


                                                      TJR
                                                                                           Docket No: 9154-04
                                                                                          29 August 2005






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 16 August 2005. 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 13 July 1970 at age 17 and served for a year without disciplinary incident. However, on 30 July and again on 9 November 1981 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect, destruction of government property, and disobedience.
During the period from 8 March to 12 September 1972 you received three more NJPs for failure to maintain a proper uniform, failure to maintain a clean rifle, disobedience, two specifications of drunk and disorderly conduct, and wrongful possession of marijuana and amphetamine.
On 26 January 1973 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of assault and drunk and disorderly conduct and sentenced to confinement at hard labor or two months and a $120 forfeiture of pay.


On 2 April 1974 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of unauthorized absence (UA), absence from your appointed place of duty, failure to go to your appointed place of duty, and disobedience. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months, which was suspended for six months, and a $700 forfeiture of pay. On 29 April 1974 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. After consulting with legal counsel you elected to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 28 June 1974, an ADB recommended that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Your commanding officer also recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. On 8 July 1974 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and directed discharge undesirable discharge, and on 25 July 1974 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, post service conduct, and the passage of time. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your serious and repetitive misconduct, which resulted in five NJPs and two court-martial convictions. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02008-08

    Original file (02008-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. On 13 April 1962 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty and sentenced to hard labor for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10254-10

    Original file (10254-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 July 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. 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 | CY2006 | 05719-06

    Original file (05719-06.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 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 | CY2001 | 02044-00

    Original file (02044-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2011 | 12499 11

    Original file (12499 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. 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 | CY2006 | 06450-06

    Original file (06450-06.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 27 December 1956 at age 17 with parental consent. On 23 December 1959 you...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 11339-07

    Original file (11339-07.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 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...