Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07157-01
Original file (07157-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE  NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   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  

TJR 
Docket No: 7157-01 
9 April 2002 

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 2 April 2002.  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 the evidence submitted was insufficient 
to establish the existence of probable material error or 
injustice. 

The Board found that on 16 August 1985, after about six years of 
prior enlisted service in the Marine Corps, you were appointed a 
second lieutenant in the Marine Corps Reserve and continued to 
serve on active duty.  On 20 June 1988 you were re-appointed as a 
first lieutenant in the Regular Marine Corps.  Your record 
reflects that you then continued to serve for about seven years 
without disciplinary incident.  During this period you were 
promoted to captain and received two awards of the Navy 
Achievement Medal.  On 20 May 1995, you were apprehended by 
military authorities due to domestic assault.  On 1 December 1995 
you were convicted by general court-martial (GCM) of assault. 
You were sentenced to a reprimand, restriction for 60 days, a 
$5,355 forfeiture of pay, and your name was placed at the bottom 
of the captain's list. 

Your record further indicates that you were processed for an 
involuntary administrative separation by reason of unacceptable 
performance as evidenced by the GCM  conviction.  It further 
appears that after a board of inquiry recommended discharge by 
reason of u n a ~ c e p t a h l  e p ~ r f n r m a n c e ,  the S e c r e t a r y   of t h e   N a v y  

directed separation.  The record clearly shows that on 8 July 
1997 you received a general discharge by reason of unacceptable 
conduct after nearly eighteen years of active service. 

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application 
the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, 
such as your prior honorable service and the fact that after more 
than 17 years of faithful service you were discharged without 
severance pay.  The Board also considered your contentions that 
other Marines who had committed more serious crimes were 
honorably discharged, and that you believe you were singled out 
and discharged because of your family problems.  However, the 
Board concluded these factors and contentions were not sufficient 
to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the 
serious nature of your misconduct which resulted in a GCM. 
Further, individuals discharged by reason of misconduct are not 
eligible for separation pay.  Also, there is no evidence in the 
record, and you submitted none, to support your contention of 
unfair treatment. Given all the circumstances of your case, the 
Board concluded the your discharge was proper and no changes are 
warranted.  Accordingly, 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 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00146-02

    Original file (00146-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    in the report of the PERB in concluding no correction of your fitness report record was warranted. Removal of the following fitness reports was requested: a. Lieutenant Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB) denied his request for removal of the Annual fitness reports of 960801 to 970731 and 970801 to 980731. ailed selection on the FY-02 USMC on Board.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02766-03

    Original file (02766-03.pdf) 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. Report B - 940419 to 950228 (AN). c. While the advocacy letters from Captain-and Sample all speak highly of the Master Sergeants -and petitioner's performance during the period covered by Report B, the Board concludes that none of those three individuals were in the petitioner's direct...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07987-03

    Original file (07987-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    V I R G I N I A 2 2 1 3 4 - 5 1 03 I N R E P L Y R E F E R TO: 1610 MMER/PERB s ~ p 1 7 2003 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS Subj : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY OPINION ON BCNR APPLICATION IN THE CASE OF CAPTAIN p USMC .. . Per MCO 1610.11C, the Performance Evaluation Review Board, with three members present, met on 10 September 2003 to consider captain- petition contained in reference (a). Finally, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01228-03

    Original file (01228-03.pdf) 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. If Capta his date of is the date of rank he would have received upon selection from the FY02 USMC Captain Selection Board. Captain Legge requests back-dating of his date of rank.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06213-01

    Original file (06213-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 April 2001. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 02618-98

    Original file (02618-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the report of the PERB in finding that your contested adverse fitness report should not be removed. Regardless, the report under Sub j : MARINE CORPS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REVIEW BOARD (PERB) ADVISORY LIEUTENAN SE OF FIRST USMC consideration is the official report of record and the one to which the petitioner responded. (7) ~ajor- advocacy letter of 23 November 1998 claims he was not aware that the petitioner 'was involved...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03271-03

    Original file (03271-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 13 October 1995 you were discharged with an other than honorable discharge. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your use of drugs. 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 | CY2003 | 02029-03

    Original file (02029-03.pdf) 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 3 March 2003, a copy of which is attached. concurs in the professional evaluation of - qualifi- cations for reenlistment at the time of separation.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00579-01

    Original file (00579-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that your reenlistment code be changed from "RE-3" to "RE-1" (the Marine Corps has neither code). It is noted that the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) has changed your reenlistment code to RE-3C (when directed by CMC or when not eligible and disqualifying factor is not covered by any other code). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 April 2002.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01134-01

    Original file (01134-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2002. 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...