Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07871-98
Original file (07871-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
Y
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAW ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

ELP
Docket No. 7871-98
22 March 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.

panei of the Board for Correction of Naval

A three-member  
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 March 1999.
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

Your allegations of error and

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 record reflects that you were

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 13 June
1975 for four years at age 17.
advanced to CPL (E-4) and served without incident until 22
September 1977 when you submitted a request for an undesirable
discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by  
martial.
At that time, you were charged with possession of
phencyclidine, introducing phencyclidine on board a naval
installation, two specifications of selling phencyclidine, and
transferring phencyclidine.
discharge authority disapproved your request.

However on 5 October 1977, the

court-

On 1 November 1977, you were convicted by special court-martial
of the foregoing charges.
hard labor for five months,
months, reduction in rank to  
discharge.
findings and the sentence on 6 March 1978.
Court of Military Appeals denied your petition for review.
received the bad conduct discharge on 8 August 1978.

forfeitures of $25 per month for five
WT (E-l), and a bad conduct
The Navy Court of Military review affirmed the

You were sentenced to confinement at

Subsequently, the

You

The Board

The Board concluded that the

In its review  of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such your youth and immaturity,
the 27 months of unblemished service prior to the conviction,
and the news clipping on your
numerous letters of reference,
efforts to cut down drunken driving in your community.
noted your contention that the punitive discharge was too harsh
for one instance of drug involvement and does not reflect your
overall character of service.
foregoing factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the serious nature of the multiple drug
The Board noted that as a
offenses of which you were convicted.
you were certainly well aware
CPL at the time of your conviction,
of the consequences that could result from involvement with
drugs.
with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge
Additionally, a
appropriately characterizes your service.
Federal Bureau of Investigation report obtained by the Board
noted that your post-service conduct has been marred by
convictions for attempted sale of marijuana, assault, and
criminal impersonation of another person.
concluded that the discharge and reason for discharge were proper
Accordingly, your application has
and no changes are warranted.
been denied.
will be furnished upon request.

Your conviction and discharge were effected in accordance

The names and votes of the members of the panel

The Board thus

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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

2



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02601-08

    Original file (02601-08.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 November 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. On 30 May 1978, you were convicted by a summary court-martial of the 39 day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11683-10

    Original file (11683-10.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. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this misconduct. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR04500 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR04500 14_Redacted.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 November 2014. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4500 14

    Original file (NR4500 14.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 November 2014. Five months later, on 11 July 1978, you were convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two periods of UA totaling 78 days, and was sentenced to a $530 forfeiture of pay, reduction in pay grade, confinement for two months and a suspended bad conduct discharge (BCD). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05042-08

    Original file (05042-08.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 March 2009. 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 | CY2002 | 05727-00

    Original file (05727-00.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. Your record reflects that on 30 April 1973 you The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 July 1972 at the age of 19. received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a two day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded a $50 forfeiture of pay, which was suspended. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02884-02

    Original file (02884-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. duty for 14 days. However, this request was denied and on 9 May 1979, after the BCD was approved at all levels of review, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06908-01

    Original file (06908-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    UAs from 31 August to 1980, On 27 March 1981 you were convicted by special court-martial of three of the foregoing periods of UA from 31 August to 18 October, 21-25 October, and 31 October 1979 to 29 December 1980; totaling about 491 days. Accordingly, your application has The Board concluded that you were The fact that you have completed and the-discharge appropriately Your totalled 521 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06039-01

    Original file (06039-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. convicted by SPCM of the four specifications of disobedience and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 75 days, a $744 forfeiture of pay, reduction to discharge (BCD). 1978 you were convicted by SPCM of two periods...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02346-11

    Original file (02346-11.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 November 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...