Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08307-02
Original file (08307-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                    BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                2 NAVY ANNEX
                          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



                                                       FC
                                                       Docket No: 08307-02
                                                       27 February 2003








     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
     February 2003. 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 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 4 June 1979 at age 18.
     On 2 July 1979 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for allowing
     others to consume medication belonging to you and using provoking
     language. You were awarded a forfeiture of pay. On 30 October 1979 you
     received a second NJP for wrongful appropriation, and were awarded
     forfeitures of pay and 30 days of restriction. On 9 February 1981 you
     received a third NJP for theft, and were awarded forfeitures of pay,
     restriction, and extra duty. On 10 March 1982 you received a fourth NJP
     for absence from your appointed place of duty, and were awarded
     confinement on bread and water for 3 days. On 26 March 1982 you
     received a fifth NJP for disrespect, and were awarded a forfeiture of
     pay and correctional custody for 30 days. On 21 April 1982 you received
     a sixth NJP for disrespect, and were awarded reduction in rate and
     correctional custody for 14 days.










On 23 April 1982, you received a seventh NJP for use of marijuana and were
awarded correctional custody for 30 days.

On 18 May 1982, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of
misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with
military authorities. You then requested that your case be considered by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). Accordingly, an ADB met on 2 June
1982 and found that you had committed misconduct due to frequent
involvement and recommended discharge under other than honorable
conditions. In undated letter of June 1982, the commanding officer also
recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. On
30 June 1982, the separation authority directed discharge and on 8 July
1982 you were discharged under other than honorable conditions.

In its review of your case, the Board carefully weighed all potentially
mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity, the length of time
that has passed since you were discharged from the Navy, and your
contentions of racial discrimination and retaliation. However, the Board
noted that the record indicated that you were treated fairly and you
presented no evidence to the contrary. Accordingly, the Board found that
these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterizatjon of your discharge given your frequent misconduct and
especially the use of drugs. 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 | 02901-01

    Original file (02901-01.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 Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. paygrade E-2, and correctional On 5 October 1979, while in a UA status, The punishment imposed was a $115 The punishment imposed was a $400 Your record further...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02971-07

    Original file (02971-07.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. As a result, on 30 September 1982, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to hold your separation in abeyance pending...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06717-10

    Original file (06717-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 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. 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 | CY2002 | 07729-01

    Original file (07729-01.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: 7729-01 13 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 7 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...

  • 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 | CY2011 | 00082-11

    Original file (00082-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03762-02

    Original file (03762-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. During the period from 28 March to 23 December 1980 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on four occasions for a five day period of unauthorized absence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08424-10

    Original file (08424-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 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. 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 | CY2008 | 07443-08

    Original file (07443-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. Nonetheless, you waived your procedural right to present your case to an ADB. 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 | CY2002 | 05461-02

    Original file (05461-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2003. 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...