DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
RECORDsO,
~
PIJar
Docket No. 5398-01
5 October 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.
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,
3 October 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.
The record reflects that you were advanced to PFC
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 August 1982 for four years
at age 18.
(E-2) and served without incident until February 1983, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty.
regarding the absence and insubordination and were warned
failure to take correction could result in administrative
separation.
Thereafter, you were formally counseled
that
The record further reflects that you were advanced to LCPL
(E-3) and served for the next 15 months without incident. During
the 12 month period from January to December 1985, you received
four more nonjudicial punishments (NJP).
of two instances of absence from your appointed place of duty,
failure to obey a lawful order,
unauthorized absence (UA),
bad checks totaling $659.
and writing an unspecified number of
an eight day period of
Your offenses consisted
On 26 February 1986 the company commanding officer recommended
that you be administratively separated.
On 24 April 1986 you
were notified by the battalion commander that you were being
recommended for discharge by reason of misconduct due to a
You were advised of your procedural
pattern of misconduct.
rights and told that if discharge was approved it could be under
other than honorable conditions.
You declined to consult with
legal counsel or submit a statement in your own behalf, and
waived the right to present your case to an administrative
discharge board (ADB).
Thereafter the commanding officer
recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. On
13 May 1986 the discharge authority directed discharge
ucder
other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct.
You were so discharged on 28 May 1986.
The Board concluded that these
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity,
your regret for the actions which led to your discharge, that you
were within three months of completing your enlistment, letters
of reference, and the fact that it has been more than 15 years
since you were discharged.
factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your record of five
multiple bad check offenses.
factors that you failed to learn from your disciplinary
experiences and you waived an ADB,
why you should be retained or discharged under honorable
conditions.
is insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service.
The Board concluded that the discharge was proper and no change
is warranted.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
Your good post-service adjustment is commendable but
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
NJPs, two of which were for
The Board noted the aggravating
the one opportunity to show
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken.
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.
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.
You are entitled to have
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12555 11
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2012. Documentary material considered by +he 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 | 11109-06
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 23 October 1984 at age 20 and served about four months without...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11189-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 20 April 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. On 11 March...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06412-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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. 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 | 07431-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your applicant, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful nd conscientious consideration of the entire record, the B rd found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish t e existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 19 June 1981 after three years of honorable ser ce. On 21 March 1985 you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10634-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11133-06
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 18 September 1986 at age 27 and served for nearly two years...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12568-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 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 | CY2001 | 02537-01
that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation under other than honorable conditions. Board noted the aggravating factor that you waived the right to present your case to an ADB, should be retained or discharged under honorable conditions. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03822-07
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 8 November 1983 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until...