DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 9325-02
24 January 2003
Your allegations of error and
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 22 January 2003.
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 23 February
1999.
The record reflects that on 6 December 1999 you were
convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of unauthorized
missing ship's movement on two
absences on six occasions,
occasions, and use of marijuana.
The court sentenced you to
confinement for 30 days, forfeitures of pay, and a reduction
rate.
The record appears to indicate that you were confined
during the period of 6 to 30 December 1999.
On 15 December 1999 the commanding officer recommended that you
be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and drug abuse.
When informed of the recommendation,
right to present your case to an administrative discharge board.
After review by the discharge authority,
the recommendation for
separation was approved and on 6 January 2000 you received an
other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense.
a reenlistment code of RE-4.
At that time, you were assigned
in
you elected to waive the
Confinement
it was proper to charge you with
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
Since you have been treated no differently than
the Board could not find an error or
Appiicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to
misconduct.
others in your situation,
injustice in the assignment of your reenlistment code.
Concerning the contention that the period 6 to 30 December 1999
was incorrectly counted as an unauthorized absence, the Board
On your
could not find any evidence to support this assertion.
DD Form 214 the period is listed as time lost.
served pursuant to the sentence of a court-martial is time lost.
Therefore it appears that although you were not an unauthorized
absentee during this period,
time lost since you were serving the confinement adjudged at the
The names
SCM.
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
The Board did not consider whether your characterization of
service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did
not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your
administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review
Board (NDRB).
You may apply to NDRB by submitting the attached
DD Form 293.
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.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06051-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002216
Time served in confinement: 20030709 - 200300711 [IHCA], 20030712 - 20030827 [pre-trial confinement], and 20030828 - 20030920 [confinement] - 72 days total time served.CC: NONERetention Warning Counseling:NONE Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00142-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2003. On 16 October 1980 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. 2 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 | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700523
19990822: Applicant to pretrial confinement.19990929: Special Court Martial – Applicant plead guilty to violation of UCMJ Article 86 (174 days); was found guilty and ordered a bad conduct discharge, confinement for 75 days, reduction in rank to E-1 and forfeiture of $500 pay per month for two months. 01-013 Applicant Discharged: 20010112 Types of Documents Submitted by Applicant and Considered By BoardRelated to Military Service: Service and/or Medical Record:Other Records: Related to...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0701043
After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, the Board determined that discharge awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Medical and Service Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found that Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)20000811 - 20000820Active:...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09675-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06946-98
in This is naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, States Code, Section 1552. rzference to your application for correction of your United- A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 1999. 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 record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10197-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. imposed was reduction to On 11 March and again on 5 May 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling three days and breaking restriction. January 1961 the discharge authority then directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700183
The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01230-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2010. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service, given your record of one conviction by SCM for misconduct. 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.