DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TJR
Docket No: 477-01
28 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 26 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 16 March 1992 at the
age of 19.
Your record reflects that on 8 October 1992 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a
lawful order.
pay, a reduction in rate,
days.
The punishment imposed was a $392 forfeiture of
and extra duty and restriction for 30
Your record further reflects that on 27 September 1993 you were
convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of a 120 day period of
unauthorized absence (UA).
You were sentenced to confinement at
hard labor for two months and a $1,000 forfeiture of pay.
On 6 November 1993 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense.
legal counsel,
board,
10 November 1983 your commanding officer recommended you be
issued an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct
due to commission of a serious offense.
You then waived your rights to consult with
or to submit a statement in rebuttal to the discharge.
present your case to an administrative discharge
On
Subsequently, the
discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct, and on 22 December 1993 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 contention that your period of
UA was the result of your personal problems.
concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the
serious nature of your lengthy period of UA.
Also, there is no
and you submitted none, to support your
Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board
However, the Board
L evidence in your record,
contention.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06700-01
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. 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. On 25 February 1993 you received your fourth NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4122 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2014. 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 | 06853-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The punishment imposed was a $1,260 forfeiture of pay, The Board found you reenlisted in the Navy on 25 April 1990 after Your record reflects that six years of prior honorable service. case, the Board concluded your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06143-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 | CY2011 | 04178-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2012. 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 | CY2009 | 10742-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this period of UA. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04677-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 02315-09
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. On 25 May 1993 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by the two periods of UA totalling 66 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04529-01
On 11 February 1995 the Chief of Naval Personnel directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to You were so discharged on commission of a serious offense. The Board concluded that the reenlistment Since you were treated no The Board did not consider the characterization of your discharge since you have not exhausted your administrative remedies by first petitioning the Naval Discharge Review Board. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01539 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2012. 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...