DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20270-5100
ELP
Docket No. 7693-00
30 March 2001
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.
2001.
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.
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 April 1995
for four years as an SN (E-3).
The record reflects that you
served for eight months without incident.
However, during the
seven month period from December 1995 to June 1996 you received
four nonjudicial punishments (NJP) for 18 unspecified violations
of Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, presumably
for failure to go to your appointed place of duty; two instances
of disrespect; and disobedience of a general order.
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.
As a result of the foregoing
NJPs, you were reduced SR (E-l).
On 30 July 1996 you were notified that you were being recommended
for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
You were advised of
your procedural rights,
declined to consult with legal counsel,
and elected to waive your right to an administrative discharge
board (ADB).
On 10 September 1996, the Chief of Naval Personnel
approved the commanding officer's recommendation and directed
discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
discharged on 10 September 1996.
You were so
On 29 January 1999, the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB)
denied your request for an upgrade of your discharge.
With regard to your pay
In it review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity.
The Board also considered the issues you presented to the NDRB.
The Board noted your contentions that you were told you would
receive a general discharge and that a problem with your military
repossession of your car, legal problems,
pay created a hardship,
and the implication it was a contributing factor in the
misconduct which led to your discharge.
problem, the Board could not determine what correction, if any,
you were seeking or what relevance your mother's telephone bill
and a credit union check made out to you had to the misconduct
Your contention that you were to
which led to your discharge.
receive a general discharge is neither supported by the evidence
of record nor by any evidence submitted in support of your
application.
contentions were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge given your record of 21 offenses for which you
The Board
received four
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.
concluded that the discharge was proper and no change is
warranted.
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and
NJPs in only 17 months of service.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
The Board
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 | CY2001 | 01035-01
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01598-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. the Board concluded that the record fully supported processing for...
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 | CY2000 | 07364-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04424-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. The Board found that on 10 November 1995, you were counseled regarding your behavior, and warned that further misconduct could result in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03131-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 26 September 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two conviction in 22 months of service. factor that you waived an ADB, the one opportunity you had to show why you should be retained or discharged under honorable conditions.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09225-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. However, on 9 June 1995, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
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 | 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 | CY2009 | 11704-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your first NUP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.