Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08266-00
Original file (08266-00.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                2 NAVY ANNEX
                          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                                    TJR
                                                    Docket No: 8266-00
                                                    24 May 2001





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 8 May 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the
existence of probable material error or injustice.

The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 17 September 1980 at the age of
18. Your record reflects that you served for two years and eight months
without disciplinary incident but during a five month period from 30 April
to 17 September 1983 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four
occasions for two specifications of assault, possession of a deadly weapon,
disrespect, two specifications of communicating a threat, two
specifications of wrongful use of marijuana aboard your ship, and failure
to obey a lawful order.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action
by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable
nature with civil or military authorities. At that time you waived your
rights to consult with legal counsel, present your case to an
administrative discharge board, or submit a statement in rebuttal to the
discharge. On 23 September 1983 your commanding officer recommended an
other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct and frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or
military authorities. On 29 September 1983 the













discharge authority approved that recommendation and directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 13 October 1983 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 had been stabbed by another Sailor
and were going through psychological changes. The Board further considered
your contention that you are now in need of veterans’ benefits. However,
the Board concluded these factors and contentions were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the serious nature
of your repetitive and drug related misconduct. Further, the Board noted
that there is no evidence in your record, and you submitted none, to
support your contentions. Given all the circumstances of 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















                                      2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03041-02

    Original file (03041-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. 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. On 21 August 1983 the discharge authority then directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 31 August 1983 you were so discharged. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00788-02

    Original file (00788-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures ,applicable to the proceedings of this Board. dereliction in the performance of your duties and were awarded a $300 forfeiture of pay and reduction t paygrade E-l. Again, you were warned that further misconduct could result in an other than honorable discharge. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07312-00

    Original file (07312-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. 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. NJPs, the Board concluded that the Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08424-10

    Original file (08424-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 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. 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 | CY2013 | NR3937-13

    Original file (NR3937-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 5. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01394-01

    Original file (01394-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your record reflects that you served for a nearly a The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 27 August 1979 at the age of 18. year without disciplinary incident but on 8 August 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a seven day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded a $253 forfeiture of On 22 March 1981 and again on 9 pay and a reduction in rate. On 9 August 1983 you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06717-10

    Original file (06717-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 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. 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 | CY2005 | 00605-05

    Original file (00605-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2005. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03191-11

    Original file (03191-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 2012. On 13 November 1991 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military and civilian authorities as evidenced by a civil misdemeanor conviction, two NUPs, failure to pay just debts, and writing insufficient...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02421-02

    Original file (02421-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive disciplinary actions, your drug abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...