Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05127-00
Original file (05127-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No: 5127-00
31 January 2001

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 17 January 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, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 13 October
Your record reflects that on 16 May 1979
1978 at the age of 22.
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a seven day period
of unauthorized absence (UA).
correctional custody for 21 days and a $200 forfeiture of pay.

The punishment imposed was

Your record also reflects that during the period from 18 Jan to
25 November 1980 you received NJP on three occasions for two
periods of absence from your appointed place of duty, failure to
obey a lawful order, and three periods of UA totalling 10 days.
On 12 January 1981 you received your fifth NJP for a 12 day
period of UA and were awarded reduction to  
duty and restriction for 30 days,

paygrade E-2, extra
and a $250 forfeiture of pay.

Your record further reflects that from 16 January to 23 February
1981 you were in a UA status for 28 days.
The record does not,
however, reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this
period of UA.
On 24 February 1981 you were convicted by special
court-martial for what appears to be a nine day period of UA.
You were sentenced to reduction to  

paygrade  E-l and a $200

At this time you

Shortly thereafter, on 17 March 1981, you

forfeiture of pay.
were notified of pending administrative separation action by
reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities.
waived your rights to consult with legal counsel and to submitted
On 7 April 1981 your
a statement in rebuttal to the discharge.
commanding officer recommended that you be issued an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities
The
as evidenced by five  
discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed
your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct and,
so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity,
consequences of your discharge were not explained to you and you
are now in need of veterans' benefits which you feel you deserve.
However, the Board concluded these factors and contentions were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
given the repetitive nature of your misconduct which resulted in
five 
circumstances of your case,
was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
your application has been denied.

the Board concluded your discharge
Accordingly,

NJPs and a court-martial conviction.

Given all the

NJPs and a court-martial conviction.

on 19 May 1981, you were

and your contentions that the

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 | 10960-02

    Original file (10960-02.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 October 2003. On 17 August 1981 you received a fourth NJP for two periods of UA totalling four days and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days and a $80 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is existence of probable on the applicant to demonstrate the material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08131-01

    Original file (08131-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TJR Docket No: 8131-01 24 May 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. sitting in executive session, considered your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, application on 21 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05812-00

    Original file (05812-00.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 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. recommended you be issued an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05868-01

    Original file (05868-01.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. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07995-03

    Original file (07995-03.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 injusticeYou enlisted in the Marine Corps on January 1971 at age 17 During the period from 1 April to 29 October...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00605-05

    Original file (00605-05.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02008-08

    Original file (02008-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. On 13 April 1962 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty and sentenced to hard labor for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01176-04

    Original file (01176-04.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 that the evidence submitted wa insufficient to ~tL DiIs]z the ~ist see f pm h 71 - m~teyi<i error o~ i~ Ustic&.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 29 April 1980 at age 19. On 3 February 1982 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03349-02

    Original file (03349-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. 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. At that time you denied suicidal ideation On 19 February 1982, after undergoing a You were sentenced to a $900 forfeiture paygrade E-l. On 12 April 1982 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10299-02

    Original file (10299-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 September 1981 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for communicating a threat and were awarded a $135 forfeiture of pay and correctional custody for seven days, which was suspended for six months. ...