Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07602-05
Original file (07602-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                    2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



                                             SJN
Docket No: 07602-05
 27 February 2006

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 23 February 2006. 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 5 July 1962 at age 17. During the period from 4 February 1963 to 8 September 1965 you were convicted by three summary court-martial’s (SCM’s) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 33 days, breaking restriction, and assault. You also received six nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for six periods of UA totaling 44 days, four instances of disobedience, and insubordinate conduct.
On 18 November 1965 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of unfitness due to frequent discredible involvement with military authorities. You elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 14 December 1965 the commanding officer (CO) recommended separation, stating, in part, that you required constant supervision in order to accomplish simple tasks and were constantly in minor trouble. Further, he stated that you could not be depended upon to perform your required duties.
 Subsequently, on 23 December 1965 an ADB, unanimously found that you were unfit due to your frequent infractions and recommended an undesirable discharge. Subsequently, the commanding general concurred with the ADB and directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. On 6 January and 9 February 1966 you received two additional NJP’s for wrongfully pawning another Marine’s wristwatch and a three-day period of UA. On 28 February 1966 you were separated with an undesirable discharge.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterjzatjon of your discharge due to your record of eight NJP’s and three SCM’s for of fences that included 77 days of UA and other infractions. The Board also noted that you received two NJP’s after you were notified that you were being administratively separated. 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 | CY2007 | 00714-07

    Original file (00714-07.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.On 8 July 1965, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 24...

  • 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 | 10197-02

    Original file (10197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. imposed was reduction to On 11 March and again on 5 May 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling three days and breaking restriction. January 1961 the discharge authority then directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 08056 12

    Original file (08056 12.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. 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. After waiving your procedural right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09267-05

    Original file (09267-05.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 29 October 1964 at age 19 after completing a previous period of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10232-02

    Original file (10232-02.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 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 | CY2005 | 03286-05

    Original file (03286-05.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, advisory opinion, 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 17 December 1973 at age 17 with parental...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 10329-02

    Original file (10329-02.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 11 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01501-99

    Original file (01501-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 1999. The Board noted that despite the fraudulent entry during your first period of service, you were honorably discharged and recommended for reenlistment. 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.