Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00169-99
Original file (00169-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
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 N A W  ANNEX 

WASHINGTON DC  20370-5100 

ELP 
Docket No.  169-99 
27 May 1999 

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 Na-1 
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on 19 May 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 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 
14 December 1992 for four years at age 18.  The record reflects 
that you served without incident for more than eight months. 
However, during the two month period from August to September 
1993 you received two nonjudicial punishments for two periods of 
unauthorized absence  (UA) totalling about 12 days, absence from 
your appointed place of duty, and two instances of disobedience. 

On 2 February 1994, you were convicted by special court-martial 
of a 31 day period of UA from 26 October to 26 November 1993, and 
misappropriation of an automobile belonging to another 
serviceman.  You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 
90 days, forfeitures of $250 per month for three months, and a 
bad conduct discharge.  On 25 July 1994, the convening authority 
approved the sentence, but suspended that portion extending to 
confinement in excess of 60 days for a period of 12 months.  The 
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings 
and the sentence on 10 January 1995.  On 4 April  1996 you 
received the bad conduct discharge and an RE-4  reenlistment code. 

In its review of your application, the board carefully weighed 
all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and 
immaturity.  The Board noted your contention that the confinement 
and forfeitures were enough punishment, but the bad conduct 
discharge has ruined your life.  The Board concluded that the 
foregoing factor and contention were insufficient to warrant 
recharacterizaton of your discharge given your record of two NJPs 
and a conviction by a special court-martial in only 14 months of 
service.  Trial by special court-martial was warranted by the 
seriousness of the offenses charged.  The conviction and 
discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and 
regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes your 
service.  When an individual receives a punitive discharge, an 
RE-4  reenlistment code is required.  You have provided neither 
probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of your 
application.  The Board concluded that the discharge and 
reenlistment code were proper 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 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08438-98

    Original file (08438-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06213-01

    Original file (06213-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 April 2001. The Board noted that it has no authority to take any action which would affect the finality of your conviction by special court-martial, and that its authority in this case is limited to correcting your record as a matter of clemency. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09726-02

    Original file (09726-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 11 March 2003, a copy of which is attached. 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. Subj: BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR) APPLICATION a. Petitioner does not claim factual innocence or any legal error in the findings or sentence of his special...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99

    Original file (01099-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY1999 | 06500-99

    Original file (06500-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 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 | 00186-99

    Original file (00186-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeitures of $44 per month for six months, and a bad conduct discharge. On 25 March 1957 you waived your right to restoration to duty and requested execution of the bad conduct discharge. Thereafter, the Navy Board of Review approved only a finding that found you guilty of unauthorized absence from 28 December 1956 to 1 February 1957.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07464-98

    Original file (07464-98.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 24 October 1973 you submitted a written request for immediate execution of the BCD. veterans1 benefits after being discharged with a BCD.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08805-98

    Original file (08805-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 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. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the seriousness of your frequent...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 07460-98

    Original file (07460-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 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. Given all the circumstances of your case the.Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04258-02

    Original file (04258-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2003. 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...