Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03023-01
Original file (03023-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No: 3023-01
19 October 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 16 October 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

The Board found you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 4 November
1981 at the age of 18 and began a three-year period of extended
active duty.
you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for which no
disciplinary action was taken.

Your record reflects that on 30 and 31 August 1982

On 16 October

Your record further reflects that on 2 July 1984 you began an 88
day period of UA that was not terminated until, 27 September 1984.
On 12 October 1984 civil authorities issued a warrant for your
arrest for felony child abuse,
oral copulation of a victim under the age of 14.
1984 you were delivered to civil authorities in accordance with
the aforementioned warrant.
The following day you posted bail
and were returned to military control.
On 31 October 1984 you
received nonjudicial punishment  
and missing the movement of your ship.
was a $400 forfeiture of pay,
days,

The punishment imposed
restriction and extra duty for 45

(NJP) for the 88 day period of UA

corporal injury to a child, and

and reduction to 

paygrade E-2.

Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
At that time you waived your rights to consult
serious offense.
with legal counsel, present your case to an administrative
discharge board, and to submit a statement in rebuttal to the
discharge.
recommended you be discharged under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense as evidenced by the  31 October 1984 NJP.
recommendation noted, in part, as follows:

On 1 November 1984 your commanding officer

The

His involvement with civilian authorities

(Member) is being processed for commission of a serious
military offense.
has just recently been brought to my attention an it was
felt that the long drawn out procedures of the judicial
system would continue past his EAOS of 1 February 1985. He
is not in civil confinement and as his military offense of
unauthorized absence for 88 days would also warrant an other
than honorable discharge,
immediately
to his last command.

He is an administrative and disciplinary burden

I have decided to process him

On 14 November 1984 the discharge authority approved the
commanding officer's recommendation and directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
you were so discharged.

On 28 November 1984

the fact that you completed most of

and your good post service conduct.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity,
your active duty obligation,
The Board also considered and your contentions that your ability
to serve was impaired and your misconduct in the civilian and
military communities was for isolated and minor offenses.
However, the Board noted that you submitted no evidence in
support of these contentions,
and the record contains no such
evidence.
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the serious nature of your misconduct in both the
military and civilian communities.
of your case, the Board concluded your discharge was proper as
issued and no change is warranted.
has been denied.

The Board concluded these factors and contentions were

Given all the circumstances

Accordingly, your application

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.

2

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

3



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09335-07

    Original file (09335-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 10 June 1988, you enlisted in the Navy at age 24. However, no separation action was taken and you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08872-10

    Original file (08872-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 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 | CY2009 | 03199-09

    Original file (03199-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2009. 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. Subsequentiy, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03038-10

    Original file (03038-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 7itting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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. On 5 December 1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11695-08

    Original file (11695-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2009. your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason or characterization of your discharge, given your record of one Civilian conviction, two NJP’s and two...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12426-09

    Original file (12426-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 2009. 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 August 1987, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00433

    Original file (ND03-00433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Please review my record and see the great “Sailor” I was before I was unfairly treated by U. S. Naval Officers and enlisted as well. As this time, the Applicant has not provided any documentation for the Board to consider.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01010

    Original file (ND00-01010.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When I was later incarcerated by civilian authorities TRITRAFAC took administrative action for my being "Absent Without Leave", a situation that existed only because TRITRAFAC had cancelled my retirement. Applicant released without bond.960403: Authorization for applicant's transfer to the Fleet Reserve, under ther Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) Program has been cancelled by Chief of Naval Personnel (PERS-27).960525: Applicant to unauthorized absence 0730, 25May96.960528: Civil...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12365-08

    Original file (12365-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 23 March 1985, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | CY2013 | NR8690 13

    Original file (NR8690 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 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. On 25 January 1989, the ADB found that you committed misconduct (commission of a serious offense) and recommended that you be separated with an...