Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07097-05
Original file (07097-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
 WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00      


                  CRS
                  Docket No: 7097-05
                  8 May 2006







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 26 April 2006. 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.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 18 November 2002. The record reflects that you received two nonjudicial punishments. The offenses included larceny and wrongful appropriation, underage drinking and absence from your appointed place of duty on three occasions.

on 26 August 2004 you were tried by general court-martial (0CM) on unspecified charges and specifications. Although the record does not reflect the findings or sentence of the GCM, it appears that you were convicted of at least some of the charged offenses. However, it also appears that the sentence of the court did not extend to a punitive discharge.

Although your record does not contain the separation documents, it appears that your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and, after review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved. The record clearly shows that on 29 April 2005 you received an other than honorable discharge.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the contention that the witnesses lied at your court-martial. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant reinstatement, given your frequent involvement with military authorities. Specifically, you were the subject of three disciplinary actions within a period of less than three years. Further, the Board has no authority to disturb the findings or sentence of a court-martial based on claims of legal error. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04905-05

    Original file (04905-05.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 November 2006. Although the service record does not reflect the offenses of which you were convicted, it is clear that you were found guilty by a general court-martial and sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (BCD). In this regard, the Board found no evidence that your BCD has been upgraded or that your rank has been restored, and you have provided no such evidence.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05889-98

    Original file (05889-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    5889-98 19 April 1999 Dear &$;:;: This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 03152-05

    Original file (03152-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 May 2006. 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 | CY2001 | 02116-01

    Original file (02116-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 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. 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 | CY2000 | 06703-00

    Original file (06703-00.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three—member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 May 2001. The record reflects that you were advanced to SA (E-2) and received the Korean Service Medal for service on board USS JUNEAU (CLkA-119) from 5 September to 17 October 1952. On 18 June 1954 the commanding officer recommended discharge by reason of unfitness and stated that on 7 June 1954 an administrative discharge board (ADB) had thoroughly reviewed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03797-06

    Original file (03797-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 15 August 1963 after three years of prior honorable service and served...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06623-06

    Original file (06623-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 matérial error or injustice.The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 25 May 1992 after more than three years of prior...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02171-01

    Original file (02171-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Board also noted that the initial sentence to a bad conduct discharge was suspended, better discharge. which resulted in the discharge being executed. 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 | CY1999 | 00242-99

    Original file (00242-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 1999. 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. A fourth special...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01418-10

    Original file (01418-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. On 25 June 1982 you began a period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities.