Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04971-02
Original file (04971-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT  OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370.510

0

WMP
Docket No:
22 November   2002

4971-02

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 20 November 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.

Documentary material considered by the Board consisted

Your allegations of error and

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 Navy on 15 October 1976
for four years at age 18.
You served without incident until 30
June 1977, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
failure to obey a written regulation.
was 14 days of restriction.

The punishment imposed

On 14 July 1977 you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful
order and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
punishment imposed was 10 days of extra duty.
you again received NJP for failure to go to your appointed place
of duty.

The punishment imposed was 5 days of extra duty.

On 26 August 1977

The

On 29 August 1977 you were counseled concerning your conduct and
warned that continued misconduct could disqualify you for an
honorable discharge.

YOU  received NJP   on  30  September 1977 for underage drinking and
interfering with the shore patrol.
10 days of restriction and extra duty.
received NJP for two instances of failure to go to your
appointed place of duty.
extra duty.
failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
imposed was 5 days of restriction and extra duty and a
forfeiture of $50.

You again received NJP on 11 November 1977 for

The punishment imposed was
On 13 October 1977 you

The punishment imposed was 6 days of

The punishment

On 15 November 1977, you were notified that separation action
was being initiated by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
You were advised of and retained all of your procedural rights,
however, you waived your right to an administrative discharge
board (ADB) in exchange for a general discharge.

On 25 November 1977, your commanding officer forwarded the
separation action, recommending a general discharge due to
misconduct, to the Chief of Naval Personnel (CNP).
On 9
December 1977 CNP directed discharge and on 1 March 1978, you
received a general discharge.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and
immaturity, and your contention that you were unjustly removed
from active duty and not provided treatment for your alcoholism.
However, the Board concluded that you could have received an
other than honorable discharge based on your six  
month period had you not made an agreement with the commanding
officer for a general discharge.
evidence provided or available that you were diagnosed as
alcohol dependent or that you requested or were refused alcohol
treatment.
Therefore, the Board concluded that your general
discharge for misconduct was appropriate and that you were not
unjustly discharged, but were, in fact, fortunate to have
received a general discharge and not an other than honorable
discharge.
your application has been denied.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.

Furthermore, there was no

Accordingly,

NJP's in a six

The

You are entitled to have

In this regard,

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.
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.

it is important to keep in mind that

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02178-02

    Original file (02178-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 14 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 2 convicted by summary court-martial On 19 February 1980, you were of an unauthorized absence from 25 January to 29 January 1980, a failure to go to appointed place of duty; period of four days; missing ship's movement; The punishment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04999-02

    Original file (04999-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 4 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted your husband's naval record and applicable Your allegations of error and considered your After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04951-02

    Original file (04951-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted your naval record and applicable statutes, pr0cedure.s applicable to the proceedings of this Your allegations of error and After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00537-02

    Original file (00537-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 10 May 2001 you submitted an appeal to The punishment imposed was a On 2 June 2001, your suspended separation action was vacated based on your continued misconduct, however, final action of the separation was held in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03354-01

    Original file (03354-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04465-01

    Original file (04465-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. The record does not indicate if any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA. good post service conduct, and your However, the Board concluded these...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06039-01

    Original file (06039-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. convicted by SPCM of the four specifications of disobedience and sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 75 days, a $744 forfeiture of pay, reduction to discharge (BCD). 1978 you were convicted by SPCM of two periods...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03147-02

    Original file (03147-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 August 1999, your proposed administrative separation was forwarded to the discharge authority recommending a general discharge, which was approved by the discharge authority on 7 You were so discharged on 9...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02930-07

    Original file (02930-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 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 | CY2007 | 08780-07

    Original file (08780-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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...