Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04748-01
Original file (04748-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X

2 NAVY ANNE

S

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No: 4748-01
19 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 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,
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

the,Board  found the evidence submitted was insufficient

The Board found you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 22 January
1979 at the age of 18 and subsequently began a period of extended
active duty.
Your record reflects that you served for a year and
six months without disciplinary incident but on 31 July 1980 you
(NJP) for failure to go to your
received nonjudicial punishment  
appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order.
punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for 20 days and
a $250 forfeiture of pay,
which was suspended for six months. On
25 August 1980 you received NJP for absence from your appointed
place of duty and were awarded bread and water for three days.

The

During the period from 5 September to 20 November 1981 you
received NJP on three occasions for three specifications of
failure to go to your appointed place of duty, two specifications
of failure to obey a lawful order,
place of duty,

absence from your appointed

and sleeping on watch.

Your record further reflects that on 9 January 1982 you were
convicted by  

surmnary court-martial (SCM) of 109 specifications of

absence from your appointed place of duty.
confinement at hard labor for 30 days,
reduction to 

paygrade  E-2, and restriction for 60 days.

You were sentenced to

a $300 forfeiture of pay,

Also on 9 January 1982, you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities. At that time you waived your rights to consult with
legal counsel, present your case to an administrative discharge
board, and to submit a statement in rebuttal to the discharge.
On 15 January 1982 your commanding officer recommended you be
administratively separated by reason of misconduct due to
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities.
On 28 January 1982 an enlisted performance board in
the Bureau of Naval Personnel recommended-an other than honorable
However, the record reflects
discharge by reason of misconduct.
that on or about 25 February 1982, you were released from active
duty and transferred to the Naval Reserve under honorable
conditions.
Personnel directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct.
obligated service, you were issued a general discharge
certificate the Naval Reserve Personnel Center.

Subsequently, on 1 March 1982, the Chief of Naval

On 15 February 1985, at the expiration of your

NJPs and a court-martial conviction.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and your contention that your discharge
However,
was to be upgraded six months after your separation.
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
Further, the Board
six 
noted that you were released from action duty under honorable
conditions and received a general discharge even though you were
being administratively processed for an other than honorable
discharge and such a characterization of service was subsequently
approved by the discharge authority.
concluded that a change in the characterization of your release
Also, no
from active duty and/or discharge is not warranted.
discharge is automatically upgraded due to the passage of time.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

Accordingly, the Board

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.

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 
Executive Director

PFEIFFER



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01425-03

    Original file (01425-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2003. 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 | 06405-06

    Original file (06405-06.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 7 July 1978 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18, and on 31 October 1978 you received nonjudicial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00741-12

    Original file (00741-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. 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 | 07996-06

    Original file (07996-06.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 11 January 1980 at age 17. on 18 December 1980 you received nonjudicial...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01321-01

    Original file (01321-01.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 August 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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....

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01537 12

    Original file (01537 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2012. On 28 March 1992 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 15 April 1982 you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03178-05

    Original file (03178-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2005. 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 24 April 1981 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and were awarded...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05461-02

    Original file (05461-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2003. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00210-11

    Original file (00210-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 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 | CY2007 | 07570-07

    Original file (07570-07.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 28 January 1980 at age 18. During the period from 27 August 1982 to 1...