DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF

 

NAJAL  RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

CRS
Docket No:  
11 June 2001

1920-01

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 23 May 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on   11
November 1984 after more than three years of prior active
service.
You then served without incident as a reservist until
16 July 1998, when civil authorities charged you with receiving
stolen government property,
theft.

receiving stolen property, and petty

Based on an agreement with civil authorities which provided that
the charges would be dropped if you resigned from the Naval
Reserve, the commanding officer then initiated action to
administratively separate you with a general discharge by reason
of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
elected to waive your right to present your case to an
administrative discharge board.
authority,
were discharged with a general discharge on 27 May 1999.
time you were not recommended for reenlistment.
the civil authorities dismissed all charges based on your agreed
termination from the Naval Reserve.

the recommendation for separation was approved and you

After review by the discharge

You then

At this

On 15 June 1999

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
such as your contention that the
potentially mitigating factors,
However, the
charges were dismissed since you were not guilty.
Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant
your reinstatement, given your negotiated agreement with the
In this regard, the Board substantially
civil authorities.
concurred with the comments in the commanding officer's letter of
8 April 2001, a copy of which is attached.
foregoing, the Board concluded that no change to the discharge is
warranted.
The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.

Accordingly, your application has been denied.

Based on the

’

of your case are such that

It is regretted that the circumstances
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  
previous:Ly 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
existence of probable material error or injustice.

to demonstrate the

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

2

.

From:

To:

Subj:

Ref:

I

DEPARTMENT OF  
Tl+ NAVY
NAVAL AND MARINE CORPS RESERVE CENTER

6337 BALBOA BOULEVARD

ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 

91316-1664

.

Commanding Off
Center Encino,
Chairman, Board for Correction  

icer; Naval  and Marine Corps Rese
California

elf Naval Records

5800
Ser NO/ 
8 Apr 01

3%

rve

REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE  

F

DISCk.ARGE DOCUMENTATION IN THE

(a)

(b)
(c)
(d
(e
(f

ltr

98--LACK-0084-6SNA

Board for Correction of Naval Records  
Docket No. 01920-01 of 15 Mar 01
NCIS Case Control 15 JUL  
PHONCON NMCRC
Field Office'
Milita
Naval 
PHONCON NMCRC Enci
Attorney's 
Manual For Courts-Martial
(1998 Edition)

f  21 Mar 01

United States

Offic

Encinomm/NCIS NAWC China Lake

Kern County District

~23 Mar 01

P:rocedure Notice  

-

Let-:er of Notification and

,

dtd

Letgal Officer ltr of

Encl: (1

(2 )
(3
(4;
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)

1t.r 5801 Ser  

Administrative Separation  
Notification Procedure,
Statement of Awareness, ICO
16 Mar 99
NAVMARCORESCEN ENCINO CA  
8 Apr 99
NAVMARCORESCEN ENCINO CA  
23 Apr 99
NAVMARCORESCEN ENCINO CA  
10 May 99
NAVRESRE.DCOM  REG NINTEEN ltr 5800 Ser  
26 May 99
NAVPERS 
NAVPERS 
NAVMARCORESCEN ENCINO CA  
8 Jun 99

1070/615 (INACTIVE) (Rev. 5-81)
1070/613 (Rev. 10-81)

ltr 5800 Ser  

ltr 1910 Ser  

NO/117 of

NO/141 of

NOOB/650 of

NO/152 of

In response 

1.
forwarded.
was inadvertently left off under the signature block of
enclosure (2).

(a), enclosures 

It should be noted that the notation, "By direction"

(1) through (8) are

td reference

Reference (b), the Naval Criminal Investigation Service

2.
(NCIS) investigation case file,
support the separation action,
following the separation action at the request of the NCIS

and principle evidence used to
was not retained at this command

I

Subj:

Special Agent handling the investigation of Subject.
receipt of reference (a),
China Lake Field Office (reference (c)) to request a copy of
We were informed that reference (b) had been
reference (b).
forwarded to NCIS headquarters in Washington,  
to reference (c),
made in writing to:

requests for copies  

this command contacted the NCIS NAWC

o:! reference (b) may be

D-C..

According

Upon

DIRECTOR
NAVAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION SERVICE (ATTN: CODE OOJF)
WASHINGTON NAVY YARD BLDG 111
901 M STREET SE
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20388-5380

3.

Reply to Subject's contentions of error.

a. Subject contends she was

"not allowed to plead my case"

before being separated from the Naval Reserve.

 

-

Form 149, Block  

(1) In the enclosure accompanying reference (a), (DD
9), the Subject makes the following contention:

"I was separated from the U.S. Navy (Reserve)

due to misconduct with a  
was found not guilty on all counts and was not
allowed to plead my case before a court martial prior
to separation."

RE-4 reenlistment code. I

(2) At the start of the separation action, the Subject

(l)), in accordance with reference (d), Article  
As indicated in enclosure (1) by Subject's initials and

was sent a Letter of Notification and Statement of Awareness
(enclosure 
402.
signature, Subject waived her right to request an Administrative
Reference (d)
Board in connection with the separation action.
has no provision for any form of Courts-Martial to be convened
for the purposes of adjudicating an administrative separation
action.

9

1910-

(3) The above contention by the Subject is also

factually incorrect as to the status  
determination regarding this matter.
County District Attorney's Office in reference (e), and by the
Subject's own statement in the attachment to the enclosure of

of. any judicial
As described by the Kern

.

Subj:

.

reference (a), civilian criminal charges against Subject were
dismissed prior to any judicial determination being rendered.

b. Subject contends she does not understand how she could

be administratively separated without Courts-Martial or
Nonjudicial Punishment procedures being undertaken.

(1) In the attachment to the enclosure of reference

(a), the Subject makes the following contention:

"In light of the above, I am  

in awe as to "How

could the Navy discharge me under these conditions
without a court martial or a Non  
There is nothing to