DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TRG
Docket No:
29 March 2001
6328-00
Dear
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 27 March 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 Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 21 June 1991.
On 8 August 1991 you received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for
reckless or drunken driving.
nonjudicial punishment for an unspecified period of unauthorized
absence of probably less than one day.
On 8 February 1993 you received
The record shows you reported to the Navy Radio Transmitting
Facility, Totsuka, Japan on 20 July 1995.
On 9 December 1997
your driving privileges were restricted after it was discovered
that you had not maintained auto insurance.
received NJP for another short period of unauthorized absence.
The punishment was a suspended reduction in rate from ET2 (E-5)
to ET3 (E-4).
About eight days later, you were an unauthorized
absentee for about 90 minutes and the suspension was vacated.
This resulted in your reduction to ET3.
On 5 March 1998 you
In the performance evaluation for the period 16 March 1997 to 13
March 1998 you were assigned adverse or marginal marks in several
categories, and were not recommended for advancement or retention
in the Navy.
The evaluation comments state, in part, as follows:
.
.
. Unable to meet military responsibilities.
Lateness ranging from 15 minutes to 1
.
Formally counseled three times for failure to arrive at
work on time.
hour 45 minutes. . . . Creates conflict in the division.
Constantly challenges
Unwilling to follow directions.
LPC on several
authority and has been disrespectful to
occasions. . . . Set a poor example for others in the
division.
attitude, and disrespect has a negative impact on the
junior technicians and the division as a whole.
is a very intelligent individual but has made (a)
conscious decision to disobey regulations, be
insubordinate and disruptive.
As (a) senior technician, his argumentative
(He)
On 21 April 1998 you received NJP for two additional short
periods of unauthorized absence and were reduced in rate to ETSN
(E-3).
Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an
administrative discharge due to a pattern of misconduct.
connection with this processing, you elected to waive your right
to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board.
Subsequently, the commanding officer directed a general
discharge.
on 20 August 1998, you had placed an extreme burden on the
command and the Family Advocacy Program due to your
nonconformance with minimum Navy standards.
The DD Form 214 issued at that time shows the
on 4 June 1998.
At that time, you
characterization of service was honorable.
were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
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.
command was
complaint against your superiors.
youVV because you made a hot line
NJP's were imposed because the
You contend that the
"out to get
After reviewing the performance evaluation for the period ending
the Board found that you had a problem getting to
13 March 1998,
work on time.
It appears that you were put on notice that this
behavior would no longer be tolerated when you received NJP on 5
March 1998 and were punished with a suspended reduction in rate.
Subsequently, you committed three other short periods of
unauthorized absence which resulted in a reduction to ETSN.
There is no evidence in the record,
to show that you made a hot line complaint or that the reduction
in rate occurred because of retaliation.
The Board concluded
that the commanding officer did not abuse his discretion when he
imposed NJP for the short periods of unauthorized absence. In
addition, it is clear that the reductions in rate were caused by
your own actions because you did not conform to the requirement
and you have submitted none,
2
to be at work on time.
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.
was conducted in
The Board
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
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
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02009-01
That same day you were counseled and warned that further Seventeen days However, on 8 June 1987 you received nonjudicial (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of The punishment imposed was a suspended reduction in rate On 20 May 1988 you received The punishment imposed was a reduction in rate to _ Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge due to a pattern of misconduct. At that In your application, you request a correction to the record...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00556
ND02-00556 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020318, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Presentation from Applicant's attorney Thirty pages from Applicant's service record Personal statement from Applicant Post service accomplishment statement Recommendation for award dated...
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00404
No indication of appeal in the record.910604: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse (use). PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910611 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to drug abuse (use) (A). At this time, the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct.
NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00517
Age at Entry: 18 Years Contracted: 4 (24 months extension) Education Level: 12 AFQT: 48 Highest Rate: ET3 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks): Performance: 3.60 (3) Behavior: 3.62 (5) OTA : 3.65 Military Decorations: None Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR Days of Unauthorized Absence: 30 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – commission of a serious offense, authority:...
NAVY | DRB | 2004_Navy | ND04-00218
ND04-00218 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031119. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Request for correction from Applicant, dated February 3, 2003.
NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00681
PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION BACK THEN I WAS STILL GUN-HO AT THE TIME AND HAD ONE MISTAKE (19 JUN 1986 EVENT) ON MY RECORD. ALSO, MY DISCHARGE WAS BASED ON ONE INCIDENT OF COCAINE USE DURING THE TIME I WAS IN THE NAVY THE MAJORITY OF EVENTS WERE THAT I WAS DRINKING WHICH IS LEGAL AND NEVER USED UNTIL THAT LAST ISSUE.
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00774
I feel as though I deserve the G.I Bill because: (1) monies were deducted out of my first years enlistment for that purpose (2) I would have completed my initial 4 year enlistment with an Honorable Discharge had it not been for the 2 year extension that I signed in boot camp. My mother made her condition known to me a long time before I went U.A. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge...
NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600013
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Violation of UCMJ, Article 92:Specification: In that ET3 H_ E. O_ Jr, (Applicant), USN, Naval Submarine School, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by the Commanding Officer, to wit: Naval Submarine School listing of Off-Limits establishments, an order which it was his duty to obey, did, at or near Hartford, Connecticut on diverse...
NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00626
ND03-00626 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030226. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to “convenience of the government a RE code change to RE-1 and corresponding SEP. CODE.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. At this time, the Board determined that the documentation submitted by the Applicant does...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02968-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, applied to this Board requesting changes in the reason for discharge and reenlistment code. The discharge i. Petitioner provides copies of Evaluation Reports from March 1996 through June 1998 which show he was consistently marked as "Meets Standards" (3.0) or The evaluation report submitted upon separation was not provided by Petitioner and presumably was adverse, and no longer recommended him for...