DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TRG
Docket No: 10608-02
9 May 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 6 May 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.
You enlisted in the Naval.Reserve on 12 January 1985 at age 17
and reported for three years of active duty on 29 January 1987.
On 24 April 1987 you received nonjudicial punishment for the
theft of 253 pills from a hospital clinic and soliciting another
servicemember to pose for nude homosexual photographs.
Based on those offenses, you were processed for an administrative
discharge. In connection with that processing, you elected to
waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board. After review the discharge authority directed
discharge for misconduct with a discharge under other than
honorable conditions. You were so discharged on 15 June 1987.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire for
a better discharge. The Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given
your theft of pills and other misconduct. The Board concluded
that the discharge was proper as issued and no chahge is
warranted.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07215-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting &in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 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 | CY2002 | 10414-02
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. An RE-4 reenlistment code is required by regulatory guidance and must be assigned to individuals who are separated by reason of fraudulent enlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09384-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2003. You received NJP on 22 February 1992 for a 17 period of unauthorized absence (UA) and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 4 5 days and a $550 forfeiture of pay. However, the record does not reflect that any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10888-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10343-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 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. On 26 October 1966 you were convicted by SPCM of a 67 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months, a $342...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02305-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 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. The CO of the DETROIT responded that when you reported on board the RTC letter of 2 June 1986 was noted in your service record, but the ship was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06666-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. 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. However, on 18 March 1959, you waived your right to request restoration to duty and requested that the bad conduct discharge be executed.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06041-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2002. On 21 February 1978 you received nonjudicial punishment for drinking in a government vehicle. 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 | 08605-02
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 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 | CY2002 | 09354-02
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 Marine Corps on 1 November 1985 at age 18. On 10...