DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 558-05
20 October 2005
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 October 2005. 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 28 February 1974 at age 17. You served for a
year and seven months without incident but on 12 September and again on 17
October 1975 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two
specifications of failure to obey a lawful order and two periods of absence
from your appointed place of duty.
On 20 January and 24 March 1976 you received NJP for absence from your
appointed place of duty, failure to obey a lawful order, making a false
official statement, and larceny.
On 31 March 1976 you were notified of pending administrative separation
action by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with civilian or military authorities. After
consulting with legal counsel, you elected to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB).
However, you subsequently waived your right to present your case to an ADB
in exchange for a recommendation for a general discharge. As a result, your
commanding officer recommended a general discharge by reason of unfitness
due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civilian or
military authorities. This recommendation also stated in part, as follows:
(Member’s) behavioral pattern is detrimental to good order and
discipline..., exhibited no remorse..., has not displayed any positive
attitude to improve..., refused to conform..., poor performance and
inability to establish satisfactory working relationships with his
supervisors is reflected in his evaluations..., demonstrated a
complete lack of interest in honorably completing his military
obligation.
Subsequently, the discharge authority approved the foregoing recommendation
for a general discharge, but directed separation by reason of misconduct
due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities, and on 6 April 1976 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully
weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
assertion that an upgraded discharge would allow you to receive the much
needed veterans services and benefits. It further considered your assertion
that the last NJP you received was the result of a set-up because you did
not steal anything and one of your superiors perjured himself by lying.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in four NJPs. Further, the Board found that
Sailors discharged by reason of misconduct normally receive discharges
under other than honorable conditions and concluded that you were fortunate
to receive a general discharge. Finally, there is no evidence in the
record, and you submitted none, to support your assertions of being set up
or that one of your superiors perjured himself. 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.
2
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 PFIEFFER
Executive Director
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04042-11
On 11 January 1977 you received NUP for absence from your appointed place of duty and two specifications of failure to obey a lawful order. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of the narrative reason for separation because of the seriousness of your repeated and frequent misconduct which resulted in nine NUJPs, counselling on several occasions for involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03286-05
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, advisory opinion, 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 Marine Corps on 17 December 1973 at age 17 with parental...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03316-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 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 September 1982 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07560-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2009. 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 | CY2007 | 08151-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 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 6 March 1980 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions, and on 27 March...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09388-07
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. Subsequently, 2 September 1975, an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13341-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 March 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 | CY2006 | 04904-06
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 22 March 1966 at age 19. Although no disciplinary action was taken for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03288-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2013. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06887-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2007. 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...