DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 605-05
24 October 2005
This is in reference to your application f or 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 18
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 25 July 1979 at age 18. Less than a year
later, on 20 June 1980, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to go to your
appointed place of duty, and to specifications of drunk and
disorderly conduct. On 14 December 1981 you received NJP for a 19 day
period of UA and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 19 days,
reduction to paygrade E-2, and forfeiture of one half of your pay.
On 6 May and 18 September 1983 you received NJP for two period of
absence from your appointed place of duty, disrespect, and wrongful
possession of two identification cards. About seven months later, on
6 April 1983, you received NJP for three periods of UA totalling five
days and being incapacitated for duty. The punishment imposed was
restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to paygrade E-1,
and a $642 forfeiture of pay.
On 14 April 1983 you were notified of pending administrative separation
action by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with civilian or military authorities. At that time
you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your
case to an administrative discharge board. On 21 April 1983 your commanding
officer recommended separation by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with civilian or military
authorities. On 1 May 1983 the discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed an other than honorable discharge, and you were
so discharged on 12 May 1983.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully
weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
assertions that you were constantly picked on by other shipmates, and your
discharge was inequitable because it was based on a few fights.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the seriousness of
your repetitive misconduct which resulted in five NJPs. Further, there is
no evidence in the record, and you submitted none, to support your
assertion. 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 | CY2003 | 05149-03
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 14 November 1980 after three years of prior honorable service. On that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07995-03
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 injusticeYou enlisted in the Marine Corps on January 1971 at age 17 During the period from 1 April to 29 October...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05456 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 March 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. 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 | CY2010 | 01540-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 2010. 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 | 06179-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. received NJP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, and assault. 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 | 05127-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 12 January 1981 you received your fifth NJP for a 12 day period of UA and were awarded reduction to duty and restriction for 30 days, paygrade E-2, extra and a $250 forfeiture of pay. The record does not, however,...
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 | CY2007 | 08139-07
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02008-08
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 | CY2010 | 06717-10
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...