DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 588-05
20 October 2005
This is in reference to your application for correction of your late
husband’s 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 12 October 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
late husband’s 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.
Your late husband enlisted in the Marine Corps on 25 April 1978 at age 18.
He served without disciplinary incident until 25 February 1979 when he
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a
17 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
On 2 July 1979 your late husband was convicted by special court-martial
(SPCM) of two periods of UA totalling 45 days and failure to go to his
appointed place of duty. He was sentenced to a $275 forfeiture of pay,
confinement at hard labor for one month, and a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). On 9 July 1978 he waived restoration to duty and requested
immediate execution of the BCD, stating in part, that he could not accept
and did not like the military way of life.
Subsequently, the BCD was approved at all levels of review and on 26
November 1980 he was so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your late husband’s entire record and your
application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
his youth and your plea that his discharge be
upgraded. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your late husband’s discharge
because of the seriousness of his repetitive and lengthy periods of UA, and
his request for immediate execution of the BCD. 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 PFIEFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR466 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04389-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. About six months later, on 8 January 1969, he received NUP for a nine 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 | CY2008 | 08788-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2009. 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish...
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 | CY2006 | 03745-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s 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.Your late husband enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 14 December 1942 at the age of 17. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11738-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02870-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2005. On 27 February 1987 he began an unauthorized absence (UA) that ended on 15 March 1987, a period of about 24 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 | CY2006 | 08595-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 July 2007. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08858-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Although your husband’s commanding officer recommended that he be retained in the naval service, the Chief of Naval Personnel directed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00618-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Subsequently, upon his return, on 19 February 1970, he submitted a request for an administrative discharge in order to avoid trial by another court-martial for the additional periods of UA. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to...