DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 226-01
28 June 2001
; = i = saat eT
eae
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 26 June 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The
Board was unable to obtain your service record and conducted its
review based on the documentation submitted with your
application.
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 26 March 1981 at the
age of 18. Your record reflects that you served for nearly two
years without disciplinary incident but on 21 January 1983 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty and were awarded extra duty and
restriction for 10 days. On 1 February 1983 you received NJP for
failure to obey a lawful order, using provoking speech/gestures,
and breaking restriction. The punishment imposed was
correctional custody for 30 days. On 18 March 1983 you received
your third NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and
were awarded restriction and extra duty for seven days.
On 22 March 1983 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action under the provisions of Project Upgrade, by
reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions. You
then waived your rights to consult with legal counsel and to
submit a statement in rebuttal to the discharge. The commanding
officer recommended a general discharge by reason of misconduct.
However, the discharge authority directed a general discharge by
reason of convenience of the government due to Project Upgrade,
and on 29 March 1983 you were so discharged. At that time your
conduct average was 2.7.
Character of service was based, in part, on conduct and overall
trait averages which were computed from marks assigned during
periodic evaluations. An average of 3.0 in conduct was
required at the time of your service for a fully honorable
characterization of service.
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 contention that, in accordance
with the guidelines of Project Upgrade, you were to receive a
fully honorable discharge six months after your separation
providing you were not involved in any further disciplinary
infractions. However, the Board concluded these factors and
contention were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
characterization of your service because of your frequent
misconduct, which resulted in three disciplinary actions, and
since your conduct average was insufficiently high to warrant an
honorable discharge. Further, there is no evidence in the record
to support your contention, and no discharge is upgraded merely
because of the passage of time. Given all the circumstances of
your case, the Board concluded your 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00131-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. 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 | CY2002 | 07139-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your record reflects that you served for a year and seven months without disciplinary incident but on 14 April 1981 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for assault and were awarded a $150 forfeiture of pay. received...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03912-06
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 enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 13 January 1982 at age 19. The punishment imposed was a $200...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01600-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 August 2000. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your record reflects that on 2 July 1982 The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 January 1981 at the age of 19. you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of absence from your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00898-01
On 3 June 1983 an ADB recommended you be issued a general discharge by reason of Shortly thereafter, on 17 May After misconduct due to drug abuse. discharged by reason of misconduct normally receive discharges Accordingly, you were under other than honorable conditions. 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 | 04252-01
Docket No: 4252-01 23 November 2001 .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 20 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02759-07
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 enlisted in the Navy on 22 August 1979 at age 18 and served for more than two years without...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01160-01
& A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. case, the Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02437-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 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. your application, together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02198-04
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 1 August 1980 at age 20. You served...