Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06399-01
Original file (06399-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOAR0 FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

TJR
Docket No: 6399-01
20 February   2002

Dear

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 12 February 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.
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.

Your record reflects that on  

1,3 June 1966 you

court-

You were sentenced to hard labor for

paygrade E-l, and restriction for 14 days. On

The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 25 August 1965 at the
age of 20.
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a four day period of
unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded a $23 forfeiture of
pay, reduction to 
4 August 1966 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM)
of an 11 day period of UA.
25 days, restriction for 25 days, and a $60 forfeiture of pay.
'On 17 January and again on 1 November 1967 you received NJP for
failure to obey a lawful order and two periods of UA totalling
five days.
On 9 May 1968 you were convicted by special  
martial (SPCM) of an 86 day period of UA and were awarded
confinement at hard labor for five months and a $450 forfeiture
of pay.
Your record further reflects that on 26 February 1969 you were
convicted by SPCM of a 105 day period of UA.
However, the
charges were dismissed because you did not receive a speedy
trial.

On 14 April 1969 you were convicted by SPCM of a 24 day

period of UA.
for six months and a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
was approved at all levels of review,
30 January 1970.

You were sentenced to confinement at hard labor

you were so discharged on

After the BCD

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and post service conduct.
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive
misconduct, which resulted in four  
convictions.
which you did not receive disciplinary action.
circumstances of your case,
was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
your application has been denied.

NJPs and three court-martial
The Board also noted the 105 day period of UA for
Given all the
the Board concluded your discharge
Accordingly,

However, 

tl

xe

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 | CY2008 | 03697-08

    Original file (03697-08.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. Your request for discharge was granted and on 25 March 1976, you received an other than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 04596-00

    Original file (04596-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 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. January 1968 you received NJP for a 14 day period of UA and were awarded a $20 forfeiture of pay. Given the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06684-01

    Original file (06684-01.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 March 2001. 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. A year later, on 12 April 1968, you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM) of three periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling 62 days and breaking...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06601-01

    Original file (06601-01.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 March 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01099-99

    Original file (01099-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Na-1 Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 23 April 1969 the commanding officer recommended your husband be issued an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01092 12

    Original file (01092 12.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 October 2012. 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 15 October 1965, you were convicted by a SPCM of being UA for 113 days.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09486-08

    Original file (09486-08.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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 07274-12

    Original file (07274-12.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in two NJP’s, two SPCM convictions of very lengthy periods of UA, charges being preferred to a court-martial for periods of UA totaling...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05129-10

    Original file (05129-10.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 February 2011. 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. Cofisequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...