Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04674-01
Original file (04674-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TJR
Docket No: 4674-01
19 December 2001

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 11 December 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

The Board found you reenlisted in the Navy on 18 October 1957
after three years of prior honorable service.
reflects that you continued to serve without disciplinary
incident for two years and four months.
1961, you received nonjudicial punishment  
aboard your ship and were awarded a reduction in rate.
On 16
November 1961 you received counselling regarding your failure to
pay just debts.

(NJP) for gambling

Your record

However, on 14 February

Your record contains two administrative remarks-(page 11) entries
dated 22 April and 16 May 1965 which indicate that you received
counselling regarding your failure to pay just debts.

Your record further reflects that on 4 June 1965 you received NJP
for failure to obey a lawful order and were awarded a suspended
reduction in rate.
On 1 December 1965 you received your third
NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and were
awarded a reduction in rate.

On 14 February 1966 you acknowledged that you were not
recmended  for reenlistment due to poor performance, as
evidenced by your receiving two  
and your failure to pay just debts.
part, as follows:

NJPs within an eight month period
The page 11 entry noted, in

(Member) not recommended for reenlistment. (He) has
displayed very poor performance and shows very little, if
any potential for further useful and responsible service.
This is demonstrated by the fact the (he) has had two CO
NJPs within the past 8 months.
continually displayed unreliability due to failure to pay
just debts, even after considerable counselling.

In addition, (he) has

On 17 February 1966, at the expiration of your enlistment, you
were issued a general discharge.
average was 2.9.

At that time your conduct

Character of service was based, in part, on conduct and
performance averages which were computed from marks assigned
during periodic evaluations.
required at the time of your service for a fully honorable
characterization of service.

An average of 3.0 in conduct was

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your prior honorable service, post service conduct, and your
contention that the general discharge was unjust and too severe
as punishment for your failure to obey an order.
considered the letter of recommendation provided in support of
your case. However,
the Board concluded these factors and
contention were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
characterization of your service because of your repetitive
misconduct, which resulted in three  
counselling, and since your conduct average was insufficiently
high to warrant a fully honorable characterization of service.
Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded
your discharge was proper and no change is warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

NJPs and frequent

The Board also

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.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.

2

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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03144-08

    Original file (03144-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 February 2009. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your characterization of service given your two SPCM convictions, the diagnosed character disorder, and your failure to attain the required average in conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02596-03

    Original file (02596-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 August 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 1966, you were separated with a general discharge. 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 | CY2002 | 00642-02

    Original file (00642-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures'applicable to the proceedings of this Board. a forfeiture of $33 and 14 days of restriction. 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 | CY2002 | 06282-00

    Original file (06282-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You continued to serve in the Marine Corps and whea you You were honorably discharged on During this period you Individuals discharged for unsuitability received the type of Character of service discharge warranted by the service record. The Board also noted your In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity, subsequent honorable service in Vietnam in which you were twice wounded in combat, and your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08508-07

    Original file (08508-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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 | CY2002 | 03949-02

    Original file (03949-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. (NJP) for The During the period from 15 March to 12 July 1966 you received NJP on three more occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, absence from your appointed place of duty, two specifications of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08684-07

    Original file (08684-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A thfee-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00308

    Original file (MD01-00308.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.981106: Applicant discharged from alcohol treatment as a treatment failure, with a poor prognosis.981109: Letter of review of records containing Platoon Commander's thirty notebook entries.981110: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86:Specification: Unauthorized absence from 0801 to 2345, 240ct98. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07844-01

    Original file (07844-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Board. Your conduct average was 3.8. 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 | CY2010 | 07446-10

    Original file (07446-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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...