DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
ELP
Docket No. 352-01
19 April 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.
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 18 April 2001.
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.
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
Your allegations of error and
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.
At the time of your enlistment, you had
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 26 June 1972 for
three years at age 18.
completed 12 years of formal education and achieved a general
classification test (GCT) test score of 39 which placed you in
Mental Group IV.
The record reflects that you were advanced to
AA (E-2) and served without incident until 1 March 1973 when you
received an enlisted performance evaluation which assigned
adverse marks of 2.0 in the categories of professional
performance, military behavior, military appearance, and
adaptability.
that you were untrainable,
explained to you, it was easier to have someone else do your work
than to try and get you to do it, were questioning and
contentious when you received orders,
why you had to live within a set of regulations.
An administrative remarks (page 13) entry stated
each simple step of a job had to be
and you did not understand
It was further
noted that keeping you in uniform required a full-time supervisor
and you did not comprehend the necessity for basic hygiene.
However, marks in the
The performance evaluation of 28 August 1973 indicated that your
overall performance had improved somewhat.
categories of professional performance, military behavior and
appearance remained adverse.
tried to do your best, but most jobs assigned resulted in
unsatisfactory performance and you consistently required routine
supervision, no matter what type of work was being done.
You
reluctantly accepted authority,
On the same day, you received a general discharge by reason of
convenience of the government due to substandard performance or
inability to adapt to military service.
documentation is not on file in your record.
A page 13 entry stated that you had
and had questioned it frequently.
The discharge processing
Character of service is based, in part,
overall trait averages which are computed from marks assigned
during periodic evaluations.
trait averages were both 2.3.
for a fully honorable characterization at the time of your
discharge were 3.0 in military behavior and 2.7 in overall
traits.
Your military behavior and overall
The minimum average marks required
on military behavior and
On 16 September 1975,
your request for an upgrade of your discharge.
the Naval Discharge Review Board denied
the Board carefully weighed
The Board concluded that the
and the fact that it been more than
Counsel contends that while
it was noted by the reporting senior that
In its review of your application,
all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and
immaturity, low test scores,
29 years since you were discharged.
your markings were low,
you had tried to do your best.
foregoing factors and counsel's contention were insufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your failure
to achieve the required averages in military behavior and overall
traits.
You have
recruit training and were advanced to pay grade E-2.
provided no evidence that your were unjustly assigned
low.marks
or that your performance and conduct was substantially better
Further, you clearly had a
than that documented in your record.
poor attitude.
proper and no change is warranted.
has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
The Board noted that despite a low GCT, you completed
The Board thus concluded that the discharge was
Accordingly, your application
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.
2
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
copy to:
The American Legion
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07314-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your military behavior and overall At the time of on military behavior and In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and immaturity, limited...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06291-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board, in its review of your record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, limited education, and low test The Board also considered your contention...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03720-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2002. 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 and applicable statutes, regulations, thereof, your naval record, and policies. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08999-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your low professional competence and insufficiently high overall trait average. 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 | CY2002 | 03949-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. (NJP) for The During the period from 15 March to 12 July 1966 you received NJP on three more occasions for failure to go to your appointed place of duty, absence from your appointed place of duty, two specifications of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00159-99
in your record. Regulations required the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged command due to substandard performance or by reason of inability to adapt to military service." The Board noted that you have applied for the Navy The Board also noted that the commanding and that your contention that You contend that you NJPs in only 16 months of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08750-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2002. 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. Nevertheless, the Board found the evidence and materials submitted were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 13_04_27 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 1999. 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. 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 11_59_57 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 1999. 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. 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 | CY2008 | 04617-08
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. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged the separation action and that characterization of service would be determined as warranted by your service record. Given your misconduct and failure to attain the overall trait and behavior mark averages required for a fully honorable...