DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
ELP
Docket No. 966-01
14 June 2001
Dear éiilllilleliidiiaiintiitea.,
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 12 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, 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.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 21 October 1976 for four
years at age 20. The record reflects that you were advanced to
PFC (E-2) and served without incident until 7 January 1978 when
you received nonjudicial punishment for two instances of absence
from your appointed place of duty.
You were subsequently advanced to LCPL (E-3) and served without
further incident until 1 July 1978 when you began a 13 month
period of unauthorized absence. On 30 August 1979 you were
convicted by special court-martial of UA from 1 July 1978 to
1 August 1979. You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor
for 75 days, forfeitures of $275 per month for 6 months,
reduction in rank to PVT (E-1), and a bad conduct discharge.
On 27 September 1979 you waived your right to request resto-
ration to duty and asked that the bad conduct discharge be
executed. You were placed on appellate leave on 16 January 1980.
The Navy Board of Review affirmed the findings and the sentence,
and you received the bad conduct discharge on 8 May 1980.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such as your limited education,
low test scores, and the fact that it has been more than 21 years
since you were discharged. The Board also considered your
contention that you believed that you paid your debt to the
Marine Corps and an upgrade of your discharge would improve your
employment opportunities. However, it concluded that these
factors and contentions were insufficient to warrant recharac-
terization of your discharge given your record of an NJP and a
special court-martial conviction for 13 months of UA.
Furthermore, you waived your right to request restoration to
duty, the one opportunity you had to earn a discharge under
honorable conditions. 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
owiehe
ah
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06967-01
6967-01 17 December 2001 Dear 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 Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 12 December 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were then advanced to TM2 (E-5) in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05971-01
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
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...
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 | CY2010 | 11683-10
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. However, the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this misconduct. 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 | CY2008 | 06614-08
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00588-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07821-07
You were sentenced to a reduction in paygrade, confinement at hard labor, and a forfeiture of pay. On 16 January 1980, you were convicted by a second SPCM of two specifications of UA totaling 186 days and assault with a deadly weapon. 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 | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10203-02
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. from your appointed place of duty and two periods of unauthorized absence confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a $298 forfeiture of pay- Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...