DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD-FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TIR
Docket No: 4128-12
14 March 2013
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 March 2013. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
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 Naval Reserve on 25 August 1977 at age 18 and
immediately began a period of active duty. You served without
disciplinary incident for about eight months. However, during
the period from 14 April to 21 July 1978 you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) on three occasions for disrespect, wrongful
possession of marijuana, and two specifications of disobedience.
The following year, during the period from 18 May to 13 December
1979, you received four more NUPs for two periods of unauthorized
absence (UA) totalling five days, disrespect, drunk and
disorderly conduct, wrongful possession of marijuana and
alcoholic beverages, theft of property from your commanding
officer, and assault.
On Ji and 15 January 1980 you received NUP for breaking
restriction and disrespect. In February 1980 you were advised
that administrative separation action had been initiated by
reason of misconduct, but held in abeyance pending a medical
evaluation for alcohol abuse. On 5 March 1980, following a
Medical evaluation, it was determined that you were responsible
a
for your behavior, returned to duty, and recommended for
discharge by reason of misconduct. On 30 March 1980 the
discharge authority directed the execution, within five days, of
a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.
However, on 1 April 1980, you began a period of UA that was not
terminated until 8 June 1980. As a result of this continued
misconduct, the discharge authority cancelled the 30 March 1980
separation under honorable conditions and directed your
commanding officer to process you for discharge by reason of
misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature
with. military authorities and to include the pending charges of
' wrongful possession of controlled substances. and the foregoing
' period of UA totalling 69 days.
On 2 July 1980 you were convicted by special court-martial (SPCM)
of a 67 day period of UA. You were sentenced to confinement at
hard labor for two months, a $598 forfeiture of pay, and a bad
conduct discharge (BCD). A portion of the sentence was .
suspended, in particular, the BCD by pre-trial agreement. On 24
November 1980 you received your tenth NUP for disobedience and
were awarded restriction for 30 days.
Subsequently, you were processed for an administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with military authorities. After waiving
your procedural rights, on 11 February 1981, your commanding
officer recommended discharge under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of
a discreditable nature with military authorities. The discharge
authority approved this recommendation and directed separation
under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct,
and on 24 February 1981, you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your post service conduct and desire to upgrade your discharge.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your other than
honorable discharge because of the seriousness of your repetitive
misconduct which resulted in 10 NUPs and a SPCM, and included
drug and alcohol abuse. Finally, the Board noted that your
misconduct continued even after being awarded a BCD that was
subsequently suspended. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.
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,
i
W. DEAN PFEL
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11286-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After waiving your procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), your commanding officer recommended separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07289-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07289-09
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02971-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 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. As a result, on 30 September 1982, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to hold your separation in abeyance pending...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04524-09
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. However, on 11 October 1980, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge, but directed your commanding officer to issue you a general discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 12 November 1980, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04498-09
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 12 September 1980, you received NUP for 16 periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty and a 20 day period of UA. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03349-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. 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. At that time you denied suicidal ideation On 19 February 1982, after undergoing a You were sentenced to a $900 forfeiture paygrade E-l. On 12 April 1982 you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12523 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 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. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00741-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 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 | 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...