D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E N A V Y
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203704100
T JR
Docket No: 8785-98
30 June 1999
Dear
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 22 June 1999. 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.
The Board found you reenlisted in the Navy on 19 August 1992
after four years of prior honorable service. Your record
reflects that you continued to serve for a year and nine months
without incident but on 20 May 1994 you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon.
The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for 45
days, forfeitures totalling $1,105.80, and reduction to paygrade
E-3.
On 23 May 1994 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. After consulting with legal counsel you elected
to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 30 June 1994 an ADB recommended you be issued a general
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense. Subsequently, 25 July 1994, your commanding officer
recommended you be issued a general discharge by reason of
misconduct. On 19 August 1994 the discharge authority approved
the foregoing recommendations and on 30 August 1994 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 and immaturity and your contentions that you would
like your discharge upgraded. However, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given the serious nature of your misconduct. The Board
noted that you assaulted a superior petty officer by pointing a
nine-inch knife at him. Given all the circumstances in your case
the Board concluded your 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9808785
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 1999. 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 | CY1999 | 00801-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. Your record reflects that prior to your reenlistment you had four convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) and had completed in-patient (level 111) alcohol rehabilitation treatment in April 1986. The Board notes that the Navy is very reluctant to discharge an individual with more than 19 years of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06784-03
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 reenlisted in the Navy for four years on 16 July 1994 as a petty officer fir. However, on 28...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01651-00
discharge authority directed that you be given an opportunity to On 15 The request an administrative discharge board (ADB). After review in the Bureau of You essentially contend that you were improperly discharged In your application you are requesting, in effect, a change in the reason for your discharge so that you can receive separation pay- for misconduct based deficiency. The Board concluded that the general discharge by Accordingly, your application has been denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00259-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07476-01
Punishment imposed consisted of a suspended On 25 April 1995 you were notified that administrative separation action was being initiated to discharge you under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. present your case to an administrative discharge board You appeared before an ADB with counsel on 14 August 1995. The found you had committed misconduct due to ADB, by a vote of 3-0, a pattern of misconduct and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03038-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 7itting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. On 5 December 1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02500-98
2500-98 14 April 1999 Dears This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United \ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. also married with two daughters, ages 18...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00924-11
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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08767-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 1999. 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...