DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 1167-01
26 July 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
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.
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 28 June 1962 after
eight years of prior honorable service.
that you continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 4
April 1963 when you began a 769 day period of unauthorized
absence
status, you were sent a letter notifying you of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to
the prolonged period of UA.
On 19 January 1965, while you were still in a UA
Your record reflects
(UA).
On 3 May 1965 the discharge authority directed an undesirable
discharge by reason of misconduct due to prolonged unauthorized
absence, and on 14 May 1965 you were so discharged.
On 17 May
1965 you were notified, by mail,
procedure and were provided a certificate of discharge.
also requested to acknowledge receipt the letter.
noted, in part, as follows:
of the foregoing discharge
The letter
You were
"In view of your long absence from the Naval Service since 4
April 1963, the Chief of Naval Personnel desires to close
the records in your case, and has therefore discharged you
as of 14 May 1965 without trial with an undesirable
discharge by reason of prolonged unauthorized absence of one
year or more.
Your discharge certificate is enclosed. It
is requested that you acknowledge receipt of the discharge
certificate by signing the statement on the copy of this
letter and return the signed copy to the Bureau in the
enclosed envelop."
Your record contains an entry dated 16 December 1965 which notes
that the acknowledgement was not returned to the Bureau of Naval
Personnel.
The Board further
Further, the Board noted that although you
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your prior honorable service and your contention that your
discharge was unjust because you were separated while in a UA
status and without proper notification.
considered your contention that your discharge should be upgraded
so that you may obtain medical benefits.
However, the Board
concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your
lengthy period of UA.
may not have received the letter notifying you of the separation
action, you were at best partially to blame because of your
lengthy period of UA.
you had been notified and submitted a response, you would have
been discharged.
Board concluded your discharge was proper as issued and no change
is warranted.
Given all the circumstances of your case, the
Further, the Board concluded that even if
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
Further, the Board noted that as a result of your prior honorable
service you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.
You should
contact the nearest office of the Department of Veterans Affairs
if you desire clarification about your eligibility for those
benefits.
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.
2
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 | 00632-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. 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. CNP further directed that you be advised that you were being placed in a probationary status for a period of 12 months and that the CO was authorized to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07602-05
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.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 5 July 1962 at age 17. You also received six nonjudicial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05828-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. discharge. However, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant favorable action given your lengthy period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08397-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2001. During the period from 16 March to 1 September 1965 you received NJP on four more occasions for two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 11 days, disobedience, wrongful possession of an altered identification card, two periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, and sleeping on watch. Subsequently, the discharge authority directed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08213-00
your second request on 22 August 1966. Since you You were advised of your _ An enlisted performance evaluation board was convened in the Bureau of Naval Personnel on 23 March 1967 and recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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 | 03088-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 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 | CY2002 | 10343-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 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. On 26 October 1966 you were convicted by SPCM of a 67 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, a $342...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00347-99
You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for four months, forfeitures of $55 per month for four months and a bad conduct discharge. Thereafter, the commanding officer recommended an You were so discharged on An enlisted The Chief of Naval The board concluded The Board noted your contentions that you had an NJPs and convictions by four summary courts-martial and a In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03334-01
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. confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeitures of $55 per months for six months, reduction in rate to EMFR (E-l), and a bad The convening authority approved the sentence conduct discharge. The Board noted the aggravating factor that each of the prolonged periods of UA were terminated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01130-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 1999. 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...