D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N OF N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
JRE
Docket No: 6213-01
29 April 2002
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the 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 18 April 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 Marine Corps on 24 July 1990. You received
nonjudicial punishment on 10 January 1991 for violation of a lawful order by having
possession of an alcoholic beverage in a bachelor enlisted quarters room, and failure to go to
duty; on 28 February 1991 for violation of a regulation by drinking an alcoholic beverage
while underage; on 14 May 1992 for being drunk on duty; and on 14 May 1993 for violation
of orders by wearing earrings, and failing to report to a first sergeant when required to do
so. You absented yourself without authority on 19 July 1993, and remained absent until 5
November 1993. You underwent a physical examination on 9 December 1993, and were
found fit for separation. You specifically denied a history of depression or excessive worry
and of nervous trouble of any sort in the SF 93, Report of Medical History, you completed
on that date. No psychiatric abnormalities were noted by the independent duty medical
corpsman who conducted the examination. You were convicted by special court-martial on 3
January 1994, of the aforementioned unauthorized absence, wrongful use of
amphetaminelmethamphetamine, and wrongful use of marijuana. You were sentenced to be
discharged with a bad conduct discharge, to be confined for three months, forfeiture of
$555.00 per month for three months, and reduction to E-1. The period of confinement was
suspended, and you departed on voluntary excess leave without pay on 10 February 1994.
Your conviction and sentence were approved by the U.S. Navy Court of Criminal Appeals
on 28 February 1995, and you were separated from the Marine Corps with a bad conduct
discharge on 12 June 1995.
The Board noted that it has no authority to take any action which would affect the finality of
your conviction by special court-martial, and that its authority in this case is limited to
correcting your record as a matter of clemency. The Board was unable to find any indication
in the available records that the misconduct which resulted in your bad conduct discharge
was related in any way to a mental disorder which was incurred in or aggravated by your
period of naval service. In addition, it noted that in view of the basis for your discharge,
you would not have been entitled to disability processing even if you had been found unfit
for duty. The symptoms you experienced while on appellate leave were not incurred while
you were entitled to basic pay, and would not be compensable in any event.
In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied. 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. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10329-02
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 11 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08493-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. On 20 October 1995 you were notified that separation action was being initiated due to the diagnosed personality disorder. 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 | CY1999 | 00169-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 1999. The Board concluded that the foregoing factor and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterizaton of your discharge given your record of two NJPs and a conviction by a special court-martial in only 14 months of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
After consulting counsel, applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf requesting an honorable discharge. He had completed 1 year, 2 months and 15 days and was serving in the grade of airman (E-2) at the time of discharge. Letter to Board for Correction of Air Force Records, RE: Discharge upgrade/DD form 293, November 6, 1997 8.
AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00006
In reviewing the evidence presented, I find there exists a legally sufficient basis to warrant separating -from the Air Force. Clearly and should be discharged. d. On or about 13 October 1994, you wrote a check to the Moody AFB Exchange in the amount of about $50.00, and thereafter, failed to place or maintain sufficient knds in your account to pay this check in full upon its presentment for payment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01323-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. However, on 3 October 1985 you were dropped from this counseling due to your non-amenability to treatment. 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 | 01732-02
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, and the record of the two previous reviews of your application by the Board. In addition, the Board considered an advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 1 May 2002, a copy of which is attached. An SNMHAS record entry dated 12 August 1987 indicates...
While at a bar on 27 January 1993, applicant was introduced to the victim by a male acquaintance known by the victim. On 8 March 1994, the HQ Air Mobility Command (AMC) JA found the case legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended applicant's request to retire in lieu of discharge be denied. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Retirements Branch at HQ AFPC/DPPRR reviewed this appeal and states that the recommendation by applicant's commander for discharge for civilian conviction was...
AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00072
On 27 October 1994, three charges, with one specification He was charged each, were preferred against Airman with conspiracy, violation of a law ulation, and use of provoking words to a civilian, violations of Articles 81, 92, and 134, respectively. Amn-was Amn qJlKlJbwas ( 4 ) The-additional charge alleges that Amn -stole a checkbook charged as a charged with larceny because there is ample in violation of Article 121, UCMJ. Should you recommend a service characteriza- B. Disapprove the...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00424
AIK FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAIJE ( A\T NIIMIIb R FD-2005-00424 - C;E;N EKAL: The applicant appeals for upgradc of discharge to general I'llc ;~l'plic'ant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Iievicw Board (DKB) but declillc(1 to cicrcisc this right. f. CM: Special Court Martial Order No,13 - 27 Apr 93 CHARGE 1: Dismissed. Finding: Guilty Specification: Did, at or near Barksdale AFB, LA, between on or about 2 Jan 93 to on or about 9 Jan 93, wrongfully...