Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06112-01
Original file (06112-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TRG
Docket No: 6112-01
3 October 2002

Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy

RECORD OF

hl.r,:

(a) Title 10 

U.S.?. 1552

(1) Case Summary
(2) Subject's naval record

From:
To:

Subj:

Ref:

Encl:

Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a
1.
filed an application with
former enlisted member of the Navy,
this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show that
he was not charged with two periods of lost time in 1999.

The Board, consisting of Mr. Brezna, Mr. Kastner and Mr.

2.
Pauling, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice
on 1 October 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the
available evidence of record.
the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

Documentary material considered by

The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining

3.
to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as
follows:

a.

Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all

administrative remedies available under existing law and
regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.

Petitioner's application was filed in a timely manner.

C .

Petitioner enlisted in the Navy for four years on 30

January 1996 at age 17.
nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence of about six
days and missing ship's movement.

On 31 October 1997, he received

d.

Petitioner subsequently,

committed other offenses and it

A special court-martial convened on 15 July 1999 and

appears that he was placed in pretrial confinement on 11 June
1999.
convicted him of unauthorized absences from 11 January 1999 to 26
The court
January 1999, and from 11 March to 11 June 1999.
sentenced him to a reduction to pay grade E-l, confinement at
He was
hard labor for 30 days and a bad conduct discharge.
released from confinement on 8 August 1999 and began appellate
leave on 10 August 1999.

The bad conduct discharge was issued on

7 February 2001.

e.

Petitioner contends that the period of lost time from 5

The record
the USS NIMITZ (CVN 68) reported

to 24 February shown on his DD Form 214 is in error.
shows that on 26 February 1999,
that Petitioner was an unauthorized absentee from 5 February to
25 February 1999.
However, the NIMITZ was apparently unaware
that on 5 February 1999, the Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, VA
sent a message reporting that Petitioner was on board and
The
retained in the medical holding company for treatment.
record shows that he reported aboard the NIMITZ on 25 February
1999.
At the 15 July 1999 special court-martial, Petitioner was
initially charged with unauthorized absence from 5 February 1999
to 25 February 1999.
prejudice.

However, this charge was dismissed without

f.

Petitioner is also requesting removal of the lost time
from 11 June to 15 July 1999.
He contends, in effect, that he
should not have been charged with lost time because he was in a
restricted status during this period and not in pretrial
confinement.

CONCLUSION:

Concerning the lost time from 5 February to 25

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants partial
favorable action.
February 1999, it is clear that he was undergoing medical
treatment at the Medical Center during that period and the NIMITZ
was unaware of this fact until at least 25 February 1999.
Additionally, the charge of unauthorized  
was dismissed without prejudice at the 15 July 1999 special
court-martial.
should be corrected by removing that period of lost time from his
record.

Therefore, the Board concludes that the record

abs'ence for that period

There is no evidence in the record, and Petitioner has submitted
none, to support his contention that he was in a restricted
status and not in pretrial confinement during the period 11 June
to 15 July 1999.
The Board notes that the period 11 June to 15
July 1999 is consistent with a period of pretrial confinement
that is properly charged as lost time, given the subsequent
court-martial conviction on 15 July 1999.
concludes that a removal of this period of lost time is not
warranted.

Therefore, the Board

RECOMMENDATION:

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by removing from

a.
the record any documentation showing the period   of lost time from

2

5 to 24 February 1999.

That his request for removal of the period of lost time from

b.
11 June to 15 July 1999 be denied.

That any material or entries inconsistent with or relating to

C .
the Board's recommendation be corrected,
expunged from Petitioner's record and that no such entries or
material be added to the record in the future.

removed or completely

That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's

d.
naval record be returned to the Board,
of Proceedings, for retention in a confidential file maintained
for such purpose, with no cross reference being made a part of
Petitioner's naval record.

together with this Report

It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's

4.
review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and
complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled
matter.

74

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder

ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Acting Recorder

Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section

5.
6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of
Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby
announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the
authority of reference (a),
has been approved by the Board on
behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

3



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501206

    Original file (ND0501206.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “receive VA Benefits.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. 920908: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to pattern of misconduct.920911: Applicant surrendered on board USS NIMITZ (CVN 68), at 0730 on 920911 (4...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06829-00

    Original file (06829-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting that his naval record be corrected by setting aside the general discharge of 9 September 1999 and showing that he continued to serve on active duty until the date he was eligible to transfer to the Fleet Reserve and, on that date, was so transferred with an honorable characterization of service. pay.13 1160.5C states that Chief of Naval 5 1174(b) states that a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600379

    Original file (ND0600379.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Accordingly, I have separated SHSR G_ from the Navy and characterized her service as General under Honorable Conditions. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06917-07

    Original file (06917-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 13 December 1974, a service record entry was made which stated that his recommendation for administrative separation was forwarded to the separation authority. On 30 August 1976, Petitioner’s commanding officer forwarded the administrative separation recommendation to the separation authority. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing the time lost for the period 21 December 1974 to 12 January 1977.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600037

    Original file (ND0600037.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Department of Veterans Affairs Decision Letter dtd September 13, 2005 (2 pgs) Applicant’s DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500838

    Original file (ND0500838.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge changed to general/under honorable conditions. I really want this second opportunity and I promise I will not make the mistake I have made in the past. 970827: Applicant discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08054-01

    Original file (08054-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In his application, Petitioner contends that it was unfair to impose NJP for the four day period of UA because bailed myself out and would have if I knew I was going to be charged..." He points out the statement of the SSGT to the effect that he would be placed on leave and states that this individual was unavailable during the NJP process. together with a copy of Caron cannot go along with the recommendation of the majority d. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10281-05

    Original file (10281-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Naval Reserve, filed an application with this Board requesting changes in the reason for discharge and reenlistment code.2. At the expiration of his initial eight year enlistment, the unsigned 24 month extension was made operative changing his Expiration of Service (EOS) from 12 April 2004 to 12 April 2006.The lack of signature by (Petitioner) indicates the 24 month extension of enlistment was prepared...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600661

    Original file (MD0600661.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests thatthe Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501556

    Original file (ND0501556.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 VA Form 21-4138 Statement in Support of Claim PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19960321 –...