DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
CRS
Docket No: 3815-01
4 December 2001
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 28 November 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 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 6 January 1966
at age 19.
received nonjudicial punishment for striking a superior petty
officer.
The punishment imposed consisted of a forfeiture of $35
and restriction for ten days.
On 19 March 1969 you received a
second nonjudicial punishment for failure to obey a lawful order.
The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to RM3 (E-4),
which was suspended for six months.
On 1 October 1969 you were
honorably released from active duty and transferred to the Naval
Reserve.
participated in reserve activities, been advanced in rank to
chief petty officer,
The Board noted
nonjudicial punishments.
punishments occurred more than two years ago, the evidence used
to impose the nonjudicial punishments has been destroyed and is
unavailable to the Board.
presumption of regularity and assumed that the commanding officer
and become eligible for reserve retirement.
your 'contentions concerning the imposition of two
The record reflects that on 29 November 1966 you
Since your release from active duty, you have
However, since the nonjudicial
Accordingly, the Board exercised a
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
acted properly in imposing the two nonjudicial punishments.
The Board also noted your performance of duties prior to and
subsequent to the nonjudicial punishments, but found that it was
insufficient to warrant the deletion of established misconduct
from your record.
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
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
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04679-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2010. 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 | CY2006 | 01004-06
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program of the Naval Reserve on 22 July 1997 and incurred an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 04079-04
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.You reenlisted in the Navy on 13 June 2001 as a petty officer second class (DK2; E-5). However,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03926-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2010. 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 requested suspension of the BCD and restoration to earn an honorable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05232-06
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 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 28 July 1999. The punishment imposed consisted of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03659-02
The record On 30 July 2001 you appealed the NJP based on an investigation into the chain of custody of the urine samples, and a negative analysis of a hair sample you submitted to a private laboratory after the NJP. The Board concurred With regard to your contentions pertaining to the chain of custody of the urine samples, sample, the Board concurred with the remarks in the commanding officer's endorsement of your NJP appeal to the effect there was no chain of custody problem with analysis...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07314-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your military behavior and overall At the time of on military behavior and In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity, limited...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05311-01
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. clear that you had to significantly improve both your performance of duty and conduct before you could be removed from petty officer quality control and receive a better reenlistment code. performance evaluation and the NJP, were sufficient to support the improvement in your performance, The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08743-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. 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 believe there was disparate treatment because the chief petty officer only received a punitive letter of reprimand and was retained in the Navy,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05220-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. that on 23 November 1965 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence of nine days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...