DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 1604-03
6 March 2003
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 4 March
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 14 February 1978 at the age of 19. On 24
October 1978 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a day of
unauthorized absence (UA), absence from your appointed place of duty,
and failure to obey a lawful order. The punishment imposed was a $100
forfeiture of pay and a suspended reduction in rate.
On 19 December 1979 you received NJP for a four day period of UA and
were awarded extra duty and restriction for 10 days. Approximately five
months later, on 28 May 1980, you received your third NJP for two
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order and four periods of
absence from your appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was a
$250 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra duty for 20 days.
You were then UA during the 196 day period from 3 July 1980 to 15
January 1981. Subsequently, you submitted a written request for an
other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial
for the foregoing period of UA. Prior to submitting this request for
discharge, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were advised
of your rights, and warned of the probable adverse consequences of
accepting such a discharge. On 4 March 1981 your request for discharge
was granted and on 12 March 1981 you received an other than honorable
discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. As a result of this
action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and
the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard
labor.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully
weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
immaturity, post service conduct, your numerous character reference
statements, and the statement from the American Legion provided in support
of your case. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and
contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge because of your frequent misconduct and especially the lengthy
period of UA which resulted in your request for discharge. The Board
believes that considerable clemency was extended to you when your request
for discharge was approved since, by this action, you escaped the
possibility of confinement at hard labor and a punitive discharge. The
Board also concluded that you received the benefit of your bargain with the
Navy when your request for discharge was granted and should not be
permitted to change it now. 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
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02433-02
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your frequent misconduct and the lengthy period of UA which resulted in your request for discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05345-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 29 July 1980 you were convicted by a special court-martial of two periods of unauthorized absence totaling 131 days, from 31 You were sentenced to confinement at hard January to 26 March 1980 and 28 April to 14 July...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01317-04
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 materialThe Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 26 June 1976, and commenced 36 months of active duty on 30...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04465-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 November 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. The record does not indicate if any disciplinary action was taken for this period of UA. good post service conduct, and your However, the Board concluded these...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03354-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2001. 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. these factors...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09492-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 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 8 June 1981 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
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 | BCNR | CY2002 | 10960-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 October 2003. On 17 August 1981 you received a fourth NJP for two periods of UA totalling four days and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 14 days and a $80 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is existence of probable on the applicant to demonstrate the material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08166-00
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2001. The record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this period of UA. However, the Board concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant a change in the characterization of your service because of your frequent misconduct, which resulted in six disciplinary actions, and since your conduct average...