Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06231-00
Original file (06231-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

ELP
Docket No. 6231-00
5 March 2001

 

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 for the Board for Correction of Navy
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 March 2001. 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 Navy on 9 June 1980 for
four years at age 18. The record reflects that you were advanced
to SMSA (E-2) and served without incident until January 1981 when
you were reported in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for four
days from 2-6 January 1981. No disciplinary was taken and you
were subsequently advanced to SMSN (E-3).

The record reflects your had two further UAs totalling about 43
days, from 11 May-9 June and 8-23 July 1983. You were convicted
by special court-martial on 11 September 1983, presumably of the
two foregoing periods of UA and other charges. However, the
facts and circumstances surrounding the special court-martial
conviction are not filefin the service record. You were
apparently sentenced to a bad conduct discharge and were placed
on appellate leave on 3 October 1983. The Navy Court of Military
Review affirmed the findings and the sentence, and you: received
the bad conduct discharge on 12 June 1984.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and
immaturity, period of satisfactory service, and the fact that it
has been more than 16 years since you were discharged. The Board
noted your contentions but was also aware that you submitted no
evidence in support of any of those assertions. Absent evidence
to the contrary, your conviction and discharge were effected in
accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge
appropriately characterizes your service. It is incumbent upon
you to prove to the satisfaction of the Board that an error or
injustice occurred. You provide neither probative evidence nor a
persuasive argument in support of your application. The Board
concluded that the discharge was 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 | CY2001 | 04140-01

    Original file (04140-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 6 November 1980 you received NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $125 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 14 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07172-99

    Original file (07172-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2000. 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. While you were placed in a rehabilitation Whether you The Board concluded that recharacterization of your discharge is not warranted given your record of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03764-01

    Original file (03764-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and 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. you& appointed place of duty On 25 October 1983 vou received was On 15 November 1983 the BCD was to be executed, Subsequently, the suspension of the forfeitures and BCD were vacated. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden‘is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02451-01

    Original file (02451-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and considered your 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. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct, including drug abuse and assault, which resulted in five conviction. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07529-07

    Original file (07529-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 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. About four months later, on 2 November 1984, you were convicted by SPCM of a 48 day period of UA and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 63...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02466-06

    Original file (02466-06.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 30 September 1981 after four years of prior honorable service. The...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03450-01

    Original file (03450-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were sentenced On 27 July 1983 you were again convicted by paygrade E-2, and a $1,500 The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, of UA do not justify a BCD. factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequent and lengthy periods of UA, which resulted in three court-martial Given the circumstances of your case, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03772-02

    Original file (03772-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2002. 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05971-01

    Original file (05971-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) denied your request for recharacterization of your discharge on 4 September 1985. court-martialed on your 21st birthday to make an example out of you, the discharge was unjust, and that your pay record was lost from 1978 to 1979. foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of four NJPs and a special court-martial conviction. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • 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...