DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
X
2 NAVY ANNE
S
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 1447-01
4 April 2001
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 3 April 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.
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.
The record shows that you then served in a satisfactory
On 12 November 1996 you were placed
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 6 July 1994 at
age 17.
manner for over two years.
on limited duty following knee surgery.
received nonjudicial punishment for larceny and wrongful
appropriation.
and a reduction in rate from DPSN (E-3) to DPSA (E-2).
Subsequently, it was determined that you should be discharged due
to your physical disability.
The performance evaluation for the
period 9 August 1997 to 28 January 1998 indicates that you were
progressing towards advancement and were not recommended for
retention in the Navy.
The punishment imposed included forfeiture of pay
On 27 February 1997 you
The evaluation comments state as follows:
.
.
. (He) is capable of quality work but
.
forth the effort to consistently produce
Under direct supervision his performance
an above average level.
does not put
quality work.
increases to
You were honorably discharged on 5 February 1998 and were paid
disability severance pay in the amount of
At that
time, you were serving as a DPSA and were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
$8,306.40.
Concerning the offense that led to the nonjudicial punishment,
you state that you were shopping with a friend at the Navy
Exchange and that friend switched the price label on an item you
purchased.
your superior's recommendation that a punishment which included a
suspended reduction in rate was appropriate.
error was made when it was entered as an unsuspended reduction in
rate.
has improved and the doctor believes that you are physically
qualified for reenlistment.
You have submitted documentation showing that your knee
You state that the commanding officer agreed with
You believe an
The Board noted that there is no documentation in the record to
support your contentions concerning the nonjudicial punishment
and the punishment imposed.
However, the commanding officer
obviously believed that an offense occurred which warranted
punishment.
The Board believed that the nonjudicial
Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3P or an RE-4
reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to a
physical disability.
punishment, for what appears to be a relatively serious offense,
and the final adverse performance evaluation were sufficient to
support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code. In
addition, the Board noted that regulations require the assignment
of an RE-4 reenlistment code in most cases when an individual is
discharged in pay grade E-2 after an extended period of active
duty.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06328-00
He stated that although your enlistment would expire You were discharged In In your application you are appealing the reductions in rate from ET2 to ETSN. The Board noted that the discharge processing accordance with regulations and you did not contest the discharge by requesting an administrative discharge board. concluded that you were fortunate to have an honorable discharge since a general discharge was directed.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02336-00
You were evaluated by a Navy psychiatrist on 11 March 1997, and reported that you felt the Paxil was helping and that you were feeling much better. The increase was based on a report of treatment dated 30 November 1998, and a VA rating examination conducted on 4 May 1999, which indicated your depressive symptoms had increased in severity The Board noted that in order to qualify for disability separation or retirement from the Armed Forces, a service member must be found unfit to perform the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04849-01
On 19 December 1997, 3. received NJP for unauthorized absence a&d disobedience of a lawful order- in violation of Articles 86 and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice Petitioner, then a corporal, grade E-4, of $598.00 pay per month for 2 months. appeal was denied on 8 January 1998. was awarded reduction in grade to E-3 and The forfeiture was Petitioner's (UCMJ), respectively. Petitioner's appeal was denied on 8 (PT) by lawful written order and the Petitioner was assigned to 4.
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800149A
When the medical treatment was completed, the command then began the administrative separation discharge process based on your misconduct and you were subsequently discharged from the Navy for misconduct based on the adjudicated periods of UA as documented in your service record. After treatment, therapy, several reviews by various boards and being assigned to limited duty you condition was determined not to be a physical disability and you were found fit for full duty and recommended for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00625-98
The psychiatrist found that you were On 10 January 1997 the ADB found that you had committed a pattern of misconduct and recommended a general discharge. You contend, in effect, The Board requested the nonjudicial punishment evidence from your The Board was aware that command, but no response was received. 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 | CY2001 | 00894-01
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. RE-3G, as provided for in As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty, or that you were improperly assigned the RE-3G reenlistment code, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00260-00
investigation the this allegation of religious discrimination against (Petitioner) by his chain of command . his,request for Courts- Thus, (Petitioner) does not have a . the same degree of assistance in preparing his mitigation request as did Further, it does appear that he did make some efforts to do more than was absolutely required in the normal performance of his duties, Petitioner's actions.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01004-06
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 Delayed Entry Program of the Naval Reserve on 22 July 1997 and incurred an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02982-01
websites on your office computer. The Board You are advised that corrections to block 18 of your DD Form 214 are administrative in nature and do not require action by the 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 or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02760-03
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. A review of the 2. reas administrative portion of his service record indicates that he was counseled concerning being arrested and charged with domestic violence and assault, not being recommended for promotion, and not being recommended for reenlistment because of commission of a serious...