DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 3221-01
31 August 2001
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.
considered your application on
Your allegations of error and injustice were
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records,
sitting in executive session,
29 August 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.
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.
At the time of your enlistment, you enlisted in
You enlisted in the Navy on 23 June 1978 for three years at age
17.
category of the Regular Navy Enlisted Occupational Special School
Guarantee Program, which provided for training as a machinist
mate, engineman, or boiler technician.
Administrative Remarks (page 13) entry which stated as follows:
You signed an
"OP"
No individual is authorized to
been promised or guaranteed a
"1 have not, in any way,
specific school or course.
make any promise or guarantee of specific assignment
before my official assignment by the Chief of Naval
Personnel.
This assignment will be made during recruit
training and will depend on my physical qualifications,
security clearance eligibility, availability of school
seat openings at the time of my assignment and the need of
the Navy for certain skills..."
The record reflects that you completed recruit training and
were assigned to BT
were reported as an unauthorized absentee
ed absent until you surrendered to military authorities on
5 February 1979. On that day, you were dropped from school due
to pending disciplinary action.
However, on 30 October 1978 you
WA), and you remain-
"A" school.
On 21 February 1979, charges for the foregoing 99 day period of
UA were referred to a special court-martial.
you submitted a request for an other than honorable discharge for
the good of the service to escape trial by court-martial for the
foregoing period of UA.
Prior to submitting this request, you
conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you were
advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse con-
On 15 March 1979 the
sequences of accepting such a discharge.
discharge authority approved the request and directed discharge
under other than honorable conditions.
30 March 1979.
You were so discharged on
On 27 February 1979
The
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity,
and the fact that it has been more than 22 years since you were
discharged.
The Board also noted your contention that you were
told by your recruiter that you could be an engineman, but you
were actually assigned for training as a boiler technician.
Board concluded that the foregoing factors were insufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the fact that
you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial
The Board believed that
for a UA of more than three months.
considerable clemency was extended to you when your request for
discharge to avoid trial by court martial was approved since, by
this action, you escaped the possibility of confinement at hard
Further, the Board concluded
labor and a punitive discharge.
that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Navy when
your request for discharge was granted and you should not be
permitted to change it now.
supported by the evidence of record.
orders for training as a boiler technician and not an engineman
did not justify a UA of more than three months.
concluded that your discharge was proper and no change is
warranted.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
Additionally, your contention is not
The fact that you received
The Board thus
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03182-01
On 2 November 1979 the Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for an upgrade of your discharge. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court- martial. 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 | CY2007 | 10751-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 01837-08
You were subsequently assigned to an infantry unit at Camp Pendleton. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the Marine Corps when your request for discharge was granted and you should not be permitted to change it now. 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 | 03803-06
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 30 September 1977 at age 19. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08151-01
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. During this period of UA you also broke Subsequently, you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the two periods of UA totalling 363 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04367-01
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. Although the facts and circumstances surrounding the withdrawal of command's recommendation for advancement and retention are not shown in available records, the Board concluded that an adverse evaluation for the two month period prior to your release from active duty provided sufficient...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00043
ND02-00043 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 011004, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable, general/under honorable conditions, or entry level separation or uncharacterized, to include changing the reenlistment code. Pt denied any symptoms of depression or history of suicidal/homicidal ideation. The Board determined that the applicant’s post service documentation did not sufficiently demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07820-06
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 18 August 1976 at age 18. During this period of UA, you were convicted by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04666-06
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 Marine Corps on 1 May 1975 at age 17. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...