Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00142-06
Original file (00142-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 TRG
 Docket No: 142-06
 9 May 2007





Dear
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 8 May 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 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 on 27 July 1967 at age 17. You satisfactorily completed training and on 20 May 1968 you joined your unit in Vietnam. On 24 May 1986 you received nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence of about one, day. On 27 December 1968 your request for a six month extension in the war zone was approved. During the period from 7 August to 10 November 1969 you were convicted by two special courts-martial. Your offenses were an unauthorized absence of about 30 days which was terminated by apprehension, disrespect, disobedience and drunk on duty. The sentences of the court included, confinement at hard labor. You left Vietnam on 15 March 1970. The record reflects that while in Vietnam, you participated in 21 operations and were awarded the Combat Action Ribbon. After returning to the United States, you were an unauthorized absentee on two occasions totaling about 45 days.
Based on the foregoing record of misconduct, you were processed for an administrative discharge. 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 and you were so discharged on 25 August 1970.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, limited education, low score on the aptitude test, deprived- background, and Vietnam service. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your repeated misconduct. The Board believed that after receiving courts-martial convictions for periods of unauthorized absence, you had to know the consequences of further absences. Therefore, your final two periods of unauthorized absence were considered indicative of willful misconduct. The Board concluded that the 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 PFIEFFER
                                                      Executive Director























2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00279-99

    Original file (00279-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Subsequently, you served in Vietnam from 13 March During this period, on 16 May 1968, you During the next 11 months you received Your offenses were The court sentenced you to reduction to pay grade E-l, On 29 September 1969 you were convicted by a special martial of two periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 124 days. found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your multiple The Board noted and lengthy periods of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04395-02

    Original file (04395-02.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 Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. The Board found that your request was granted on 8 On 5 July 1977 your discharge was upgraded to general under the provisions of the Special Discharge Review...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04275-02

    Original file (04275-02.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. The Board noted that you were issued a clemency 1970's and not an honorable discharge as you The Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to avoid trial by court-martial was approved since, by this action, Further, of confinement at hard...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01962-07

    Original file (01962-07.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 25 July 1967, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 19. On 17 November 1970, the separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01428-07

    Original file (01428-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02638-10

    Original file (02638-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, who are discharged by reason of unfitness normally receive discharges...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08600-06

    Original file (08600-06.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 July 2007. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Nevertheless, on 17 November 1969 you received your sixth NUP for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days. The record further reflects that on 1...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02128-00

    Original file (02128-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When the fraud was discovered you were processed for an You were issued an undesirable The records you submitted show that on 10 July 2001, the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, Missouri issued you certification of military service which shows that you served in the Marine Corps from 29 April 1967 until you were issued an honorable discharge on 20 June 1970. of this document is unknown since the available records clearly show that you received a bad conduct discharge on 23...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05363-06

    Original file (05363-06.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 4 November 1968 after three years of prior...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06670-01

    Original file (06670-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your military record shows that on 23 April 1971 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for this 239 day period of unauthorized absence. requesting that original DD Form 214 issued on 2 June 1971 and the information on the SDRP 214 be corrected by removing all entries showing that you originally received an undesirable discharge. were not sufficient to warrant further recharacterization of your discharge or a confirmation of...