DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION
OFNAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
ELP
Docket No. 1035-01
20 July 2001
Dear
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.
considered your application on
Your allegations of error and injustice were
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records,
sitting in executive session,
18 July 2001.
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.
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 15 March 1995 for eight
years at age 21.
three years on 21 March 1995 as an AA (E-2).
to AN (E-3) and served for a year without incident.
during the five month period from March to August 1996, you
received three nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for a three day
period of UA, disrespect, and assault.
You were ordered to active duty for a period of
You were advanced
However,
On 15 August 1996 you were notified that you were being
considered for discharge under other than honorable conditions by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commis-
You were advised of your procedural
sion of a serious offense.
rights, declined to consult with legal counsel and waived the
right to present you case to an administrative discharge board
However, you submitted a statement to the effect that
(ADB).
there were extenuating circumstances surrounding your three
the reductions in rate and forfeitures awarded at NJP had created
a severe hardship on you and your family,
your,wife had left you
with two children, and a discharge under other than honorable
conditions would hamper your ability to support your family.
NJPs,
On 20 August 1996 the commanding officer (CO) recommended
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a
serious offense.
showed a flagrant disregard for rules and regulations and
adversely affected the good order and discipline of the command.
The discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed
discharge under other than honorable conditions.
discharged on 30 August 1996.
The CO stated that your continued misconduct
You were so
The Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for an
upgrade of your discharge on 12 September 1997.
and apparently possessed all the
The
However,
The Board
In its review of your application the Board conducted a careful
search of your service records for any mitigating factors which
might warrant a recharacterization of your discharge.
no justification for such a change could be found.
noted that at the time of enlistment you were a high school
graduate, older than the average recruit, had test scores
indicating average intelligence,
requisite skills to successfully complete an enlistment.
Board concluded that recharacterization of your discharge was not
warranted given your record of three
The Board
offense of assault, in only 17 months of service.
noted the aggravating factor that you waived your right to an
ADB, the one opportunity you had to show why you should be
retained or discharged under honorable conditions.
noted your contention of family problems.
sympathetic to individuals with such problems, the evidence
indicates that these problems were caused partially by your own
The Board concluded that the discharge was proper
misconduct.
Accordingly, your application has
and no change is warranted.
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will
be furnished upon request.
The Board
While the Board is
NJPs, one for the serious
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00801-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. Your record reflects that prior to your reenlistment you had four convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) and had completed in-patient (level 111) alcohol rehabilitation treatment in April 1986. The Board notes that the Navy is very reluctant to discharge an individual with more than 19 years of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06784-03
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy for four years on 16 July 1994 as a petty officer fir. However, on 28...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Feb 05 13_50_44 CST 2001
My defense counsel did not question During the (ADB) I was upset that the (ADB) any witness and myself doing (sic) the (ADB) about (0’s) behavior. Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN) make this guarantee applicable to an ADB respondent by stating that such an individual is entitled to “qualified counsel,” and defining that term as “counsel qualified under Article 27(b) of the UCMJ.” Articles 3640200.7 and 3620200.lv of the United States v. Marshall, 45 Strickland, at 687. Article...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Sep 21 09_17_36 CDT 2000
Further, other individuals stated that you did not notify the command until the third duty day after the arrest. You contend that the arrest was reported on the first day back to work; you were directed not to have any contact with anyone on board the submarine, and therefore could not obtain any witnesses; the executive officer threatened further adverse action if you appealed the NJP; and you were told that you would receive additional alcohol rehabilitation prior to discharge. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07476-01
Punishment imposed consisted of a suspended On 25 April 1995 you were notified that administrative separation action was being initiated to discharge you under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. present your case to an administrative discharge board You appeared before an ADB with counsel on 14 August 1995. The found you had committed misconduct due to ADB, by a vote of 3-0, a pattern of misconduct and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9808231
8231-98 26 April 1999 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C.1552 Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record 1. The CO concurred with the ADB's recommendation, stating that discharge should be suspended for 18 months to allow Petitioner's transfer to the Fleet Reserve. At the time, he had completed more than 19 years and four months of active service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02900-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 9 December 1996, the Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request for changes in the characterization of service and the reason for discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01169-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2001. 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. The Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06760-99
6760-99 18 February 2000 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 16 February 2000. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07693-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. After your first NJP, you were formally counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that failure to take corrective action could result in administrative separation under other than honorable conditions. ...