Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07044-07
Original file (07044-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                                     BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                                      2 NAVY ANNEX
                                                       WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100        

                                   

                                                                        TJR
                                                                                          Docket No: 7044-07
                                                                                          22 May 2008








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-me mb er panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were re viewed in accordance with admini strative 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 12 August 1976 at age 18. You served for one year and six months without disciplinary incident, but on 14 February and again on 11 August 1978, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty and failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
On 22 September 1978 you submitted a written request for an administrative separation due to being a conscientious objector. On 4 October 1978 your commanding officer recommended your request be approved. About a month later, on 8 November 1978, you received your third NJ P for wrongful possession of marijuana. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for 45 days, a reduction in paygrade, and a $512 forfeiture of pay. Shortly thereafter, on 26 November 1978, an investigative review board recommended your request for discharge be approved, stating in part, that it was your moral belief that you could not kill. On 21 December 1978, during an interview regarding your request for discharge, you further requested that you be issued an honorable discharge.
On 20 January 1979 your commanding officer was provided a summary of the 26 November 1978 investigation and the 21 December 1978 interview with you. This summary stated, in part, as follows:
(Member) claims that he has not always been a conscientious objector. His beliefs are the result of reading and personal private mediation. He claims his belief in nonviolence was newly developed when he learned about the dangers and horrors of radiation and nuclear weapons. He believes in reincarnation and could not kill or harm anyone because it would cause him to return as an animal of a lower form. He believes the human body is important and should not be contaminated, however, he does not object to the use of drugs. He claims the military is an unhealthy environment and that when he entered (the Navy) he did not understand his obligation. He is tired of people running his life and desires to live a less restrictive life. He believes society and government are harmful and create unnecessary competition which leads to conflict. He states that he will go to Federal court if his application is disapproved.
On 22 January 1979, as a result of the foregoing, you were advised of and acknowledged nonentitlement to benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs if discharged as a conscientious objector.
Subsequently, on 22 April 1979, the discharge authority approved your request and directed separation under honorable conditions by reason of conscientious objection, and on 27 April 1979 you were issued a general discharge.
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during periodic evaluations. Your conduct average was 2.8. An average of 3.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to upgrade your discharge. it also considered your assertion that the only reason you received a general discharge was because of your being separated as a conscientious objector. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterjzatjon of your discharge because of your misconduct, which resulted in three NJPs and included drug abuse, and since your conduct average was insufficiently high, to warrant an honorable discharge. Accordingly, your application has been denied.



2
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 PFE IFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | 20040010322

    Original file (20040010322.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    At the time, he did not object to war or involvement with the military. He believed the applicant had a firm, fixed, and sincere objection to participating in war in any form because of religious training and belief. The Board notes that many of the letters of support provided by the applicant with his request for CO status expressed the belief of those individuals that they had no doubt the applicant's request for CO status was sincere and not because he did not want to participate in any...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608600C070209

    Original file (9608600C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 600-43, in effect at the time of the applicant’s discharge and currently in effect, provides that, when discharged because of conscientious objection, Army Regulation 600-43 will be entered as the separation authority and “RE-4” will be entered as the reentry code on the applicant’s DD Form 214. Effective 2 October 1989, the regulation was changed indicating that Army Regulation 601-210 determines RE and regulates the assignment of the RE code; that reentry codes are not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03918-02

    Original file (03918-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 23 January 1992 the commanding officer forwarded your request for separation, Personnel (CNP) who approved your request and on 31 March 1992, you were discharged by reason of conscientious objection, and assigned an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02443-02

    Original file (02443-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 30 August 2001 the commanding officer forwarded your request for separation, recommending disapproval, to the Navy Personnel Command separation and on 2 November 2001, of conscientious objection, code. Consequently,...

  • CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2004-015

    Original file (2004-015.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated June 30, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked that his military record be corrected by removing conscientious objector as the reason for his discharge. On March 16, 1981, the applicant submitted a letter to his officer-in-charge (OIC) requesting to be discharged as a conscientious objector to military service.2 He stated that he was conscientiously opposed to participation in combatant or noncombatant military...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00687

    Original file (ND03-00687.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 980425 - 980616 COG Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 980617 Date of Discharge:...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014368

    Original file (20100014368.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The review stated, in pertinent part, since he indicated he had no fixed CO beliefs in item 3 of his DD Form 1966 it showed a clear lack of sincerity with respect to his beliefs and he may have fraudulently enlisted under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel). On 23 November 1990, the commander notified the applicant that separation action was being initiated to discharge him for fraudulent enlistment with a general discharge. The regulation states that military...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018292C070206

    Original file (20050018292C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant concluded that he was never advised of any consequences associated with being discharged as a conscientious objector or offered the chance to withdraw his request. The regulation states that military personnel who seek either discharge or assignment to noncombatant duties because of conscientious objection will submit an application on DA Form 4187. The evidence confirms that the applicant’s RE code was assigned based on his status as a conscientious objector and therefore,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014330

    Original file (20100014330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Paragraph 3-11 stated a Soldier would be given a BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. There is no evidence of record and he submitted none concerning a determination of conscientious objector status.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001860

    Original file (20090001860.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 September 2005, during a discussion with his immediate commander, the applicant informed his immediate commander that he would not get on the plane leaving for Iraq on 15 September 2005. On 13 October 2005, the applicant was afforded the opportunity by the IO to appear at a hearing to present evidence in support of his conscientious objector application. Army Regulation 635-200 states, in pertinent part, that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned...