DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 2994-01
16 November 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,
15 November 2001.
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.
considered your application on
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 Navy on 17 September
At that time, you extended
1976 for four years as an SN (E-3).
your enlistment for an additional period of 24 months in exchange
for training in the advanced electronics field and accelerated
advancement to pay grade E-4.
The record reflects that on 29 November 1976 a preliminary
investigation revealed that you had failed to reveal a
service civil arrest and drug usage.
recommendation of the commanding officer, the Chief of Naval
Personnel authorized your retention.
However, on the
pre-
The record further reflects that you were advanced to DS3 (E-4)
and served for nearly 38 months without incident.
during the nine month period from November 1979 to December 1980
However,
(NJP) and were
you received three nonjudicial punishments
convicted by a summary court-martial.
five instances of failure to go or absence from your appointed
place of duty, two instances of failure to obey a lawful order,
breaking restriction, disrespect, and five periods of
After your
unauthorized absence (UA) totaling about 48 days.
second NJP, you were formally counseled regarding your frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities
and warned that failure to take corrective action on your conduct
could result in separation under other than honorable conditions.
Your offenses consisted of
On 12 December 1980 you were notified that action to discharge
your under other than honorable conditions had been initiated by
reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement with military
authorities. You were advised of your procedural rights, declined
to consult with legal counsel,
your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
and waived the right to present
On 12 February 1981 you received your fourth NJP for damaging a
government truck, seven instances of absence from your appointed
place of duty, a two-day period of UA, two instances of disobed-
ience of a lawful order, and disrespect.
manding officer recommended that you be discharged under other
than honorable conditions.
Thereafter, the com-
On 10 April 1981 the Chief of Naval Personnel directed discharge
under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due
to frequent involvement with military authorities.
You were so
discharged on 16 April 1981.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity,
post-service accomplishments,
and the fact that it has been more
than 20 years since you were discharged.
your application, you state that you received a general discharge
under other than honorable conditions.
characterization.
conditions.
honorable conditions.
A general discharge is always under honorable
You were administratively separated under other than
There is no such
The Board noted that on
The Board concluded that the foregoing factors were insufficient
to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record
of 25 offenses, for which you received four
convicted by summary court-martial.
aggravating factor that you waived an ADB, the one opportunity
you had to show why you should be retained or discharged under
The Board concluded that you were guilty
honorable conditions.
of too much misconduct to warrant recharacterization to honorable
or under honorable conditions.
discharge was proper and no change is warranted.
The Board thus concluded that the
The Board noted the
NJPs and were
2
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case
that favorable action cannot be taken.
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.
upon request.
are such
The names and
You are entitled to have
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06405-06
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 7 July 1978 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18, and on 31 October 1978 you received nonjudicial...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01759-01
material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, Documentary regulations and policies. officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement. 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 | CY2006 | 05685-06
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 Navy on 4 January 1980 at age 17 with parental consent. However, on 6 and 20...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02963-09
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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03587-06
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, he Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injusticeYou enlisted in the Marine Corps on 24 January 1979 at age 17. After be ng advised of your procedural...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00475-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. 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 | CY2007 | 07623-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2008. 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 | CY1999 | 06828-98
6828-98 27 May 1999 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 19 May 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were On 8 August 1980, a medical board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04498-09
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 12 September 1980, you received NUP for 16 periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a 20 day period of UA. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04414-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2008. 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...