DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 433-01
25 June 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 19 June 2001.
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 21 July 1977 at the
age of 18.
Your record reflects that you served for nearly two
years without disciplinary incident but on 11 July 1979 you
received nonjudicial punishment
disrespect, and assault.
The punishment imposed was a $50
forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 10 days. On
4 December 1979 you received NJP for a three day period of
unauthorized absence
of duty.
for 15 days.
(UA) and absence from your appointed place
The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty
(NJP) for disobedience,
Your record further reflects that on 1 February and again on 20
March 1980 you received NJP for two incidents of absence from
your appointed
and possession of marijuana.
missing the movement of your ship,
pl‘ace of duty,
On 4 April 1980 you began a 407 day period of UA that was not
terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 17
March 1981.
On 24 June 1981 you submitted a written request for
an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
Prior to submitting this
for the foregoing period of UA.
request, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which
time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable
adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge.
Subsequently, your request was granted and your commanding
officer was directed to issue you an other than honorable
discharge for the good of the service.
action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction
and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and
On 16 July 1981 you were so
confinement at hard labor.
discharged.
As a result of this
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth
The Board also considered your contention that
and immaturity.
your discharge should be upgraded because it has been over 19
However, the Board found the
years since you were discharged.
evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge given your repetitive
misconduct and your request for discharge to avoid trial for a
lengthy period of UA.
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge to
avoid trial by court-martial was approved since, by this action,
you escaped the possibility of confinement at hard labor and a
Further, the Board concluded that you
punitive discharge.
received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when your
request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
to change it now.
The Board believed that considerable
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
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02433-02
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequent misconduct and the lengthy period of UA which resulted in your request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01604-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08262-00
A three—member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2001. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NJPs and special court—martial conviction, and the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for two prolonged periods of UA totalling nearly a year. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05933-07
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 Marine Corps on 7 June 1979 at age 17. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05544-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 27 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | 02292-05
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. In addition, there is no evidence in the records to show that you abused drugs or alcohol while in the service.’ Further, the Board concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03059-09
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 request for discharge was granted and you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of service on 2 October 1981. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that resulted...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01042-01
Prior to submitting this On 27 January 1983, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) denied your request for an upgrade of your discharge. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of an NJP and the fact you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for more than nine months of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02131-01
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 28 June 1979 you During the period from 22 July 1979 to 26 August 1980 you were in a UA status on five occasions for a total of 272 days. materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your lengthy periods of UA, and your request for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00595-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 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...