Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00337-06
Original file (00337-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                  2 NAVY ANNEX
                  WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


                           TRG
                  Docket No: 337-06
20 September 2006


From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
Subj:    REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF


Ref:     (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
End:     (1) Case Summary
                   (2) Subjects naval record
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed an application with this Board requesting a better characterization of service then the undesirable discharge issued on 30 July 1974.
2.       The Board, consisting of Mr. Mr. and reviewed Petitioner ’ s allegations of error and injustice 2 August 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3.       The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:
a.       Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.       Although it appears that Petitioner’s application was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider the application on its merits.
c.       Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps on 6 June 1972 at age 17. At that time he had completed eight years of education and attained a GCT score of 82, which placed him in Mental Group IV.


d.       During the period from 2 February 1973 to 12 March 1974, Petitioner received nonjudicial punishment on two occasions and was convicted by three summary courts-martial and one special court-martial. His offenses were five periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 129 days and disobedience. On 29 April 1974 he was notified of discharge processing for an undesirable
 discharge by reason of unfitness. subsequently, the commanding officers of his company, battalion and regiment recommended an undesirable discharge.
e.       As part of the discharge recommendation, a lieutenant and a first sergeant made comments concerning Petitioner’s irrational behavior, lack of common sense, poor judgment and inability to function in the Marine Corps. After review, an administrative law officer requested a mental evaluation to determine if Petitioner should be discharged by reason of unsuitability vice unfitness. In the subsequent evaluation, the medical officer noted that Petitioner had only completed six years of formal education and had been in reform school for car theft, burglary and grand larceny. The medical officer diagnosed Petitioner with a long standing character and behavior disorder and recommended discharge by reason of unsuitability.
f.       After review, the Staff Judge Advocate concluded that the evidence either mitigated Petitioner’s misconduct or was sufficient to support discharge by reason of unsuitability. He concluded that a general discharge by reason of unsuitability was appropriate. However, the discharge authority rejected this recommendation and directed an undesirable discharge. Petitioner was so discharged on 30 July 1974.
CONCLUSION:
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. In reaching its decision the Board considered Petitioner’s limited education, low score on the aptitude test, and the evidence which shows that he was completely unable to adapt to military life. Given the recommendation of the medical officer and the staff judge advocate, the Board concludes that, in retrospect, an undesirable discharge was inappropriate and recharacterization to a general discharge is now warranted.
The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Petitioner’s naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reasons for the recharacterization of Petitioner’s discharge.




RECOMMENDAT ION:
a. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 30 July 1974 he was issued a general discharge by reason of unfitness vice the undesirable discharge now of record.
b. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
c. That the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed upon request that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 12 January 2006.
4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN        ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Recorder         Acting Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.


W.       DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Di rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01710-05

    Original file (01710-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 19 July 1963 he was separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of unsuitability.h. However, regulations authorized no less than a general discharge for service members who are separated for this reason.j.The Board is also aware that characterization of service by reason of unsuitability is determined by the member’s military record, proficiency and conduct averages, and information pertaining to the military record.CONCLUSION:Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08505-00

    Original file (08505-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    1552 Encl: (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlistment member of the United States Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show a more favorable discharge than the undesirable discharge issued on 23 March 1971. considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Petitioner...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01827-08

    Original file (01827-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps applied to this Board requesting a general discharge vice the undesirable discharge (UD) that was issued on 29 September 1972. On 12 September 1972, he requested a UD for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for the 34 day period of UA. d. On 20 May 1980, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) considered Petitioner's request to upgrade his characterization of service to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04143-08

    Original file (04143-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SMS . Docket No: 4143-08 6 February 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD CFR Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552 Encl: (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record 1.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01502-01

    Original file (01502-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the characterization of his discharge be changed. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that Petitioner was honorably discharged on 18 February 1970 vice issued a general discharge on the same day. 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09221-02

    Original file (09221-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    % Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 'The Board, consisting of Messrs. reviewed Petitioner's all 1. former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed an application with this Board requesting that the characterization of his discharge be changed. h. On 19 January 1971, while serving in Vietnam, Petitioner submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial for a six day period of UA, and disobeying a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02747-05

    Original file (02747-05.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    2. e Board, consisting of Mr. UI~I Mr. and Mr. • reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 19 October 2005, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. The separation authority subsequently approved his request and he was so discharged on 29 June 1970. However, the Board considered Petitioner’s service in Vietnam, the injuries and other medical problems that apparently resulted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06281-02

    Original file (06281-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show a more favorable type of discharge than the general discharge issued on 21 July 1977. In this regard, benefits would only been granted if the discharges were recharacterized using traditional standards by the discharge review boards or the boards for correction of military records. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7145 13

    Original file (NR7145 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    He was not the subject of any disciplinary action during his term of active duty service. CONCLUSION; Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warrajfting upgrading Petitioner’s general discharge to an honorable characterization of service. The Board particularly notes that he had no disciplinary action and his conduct mark average was almost high enough to qualify for a fully honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03822-11

    Original file (03822-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved