Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08177-01
Original file (08177-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV

Y

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAVY 

ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

WMP
Docket No:
20 March 2002

8177-01

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  
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 20 March 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,
regulations and policies.

Documentary material considered by the Board consisted

your naval record and applicable statutes,

Your allegations of error and

Nava:L

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 29 July 1977
for four years at age 23 after four years of active service in
the U.S. Army.
1979, and extended this enlistment on several occasions.

You then reenlisted for six years on 9 March

The record reflects that you were advanced to TM2 (E-5) on 16
January 1980 and served without incident until 6 May 1982 when
you received nonjudicial punishment  
(NJP) for failure to go to
appointed place of duty and willfully disobeyed a lawful order.
Punishment imposed consisted of forfeitures of $150 and
reduction in rate to TM3 (E-41,
suspended for 2 months.

with the reduction in rate being

,

On 21 May 1982 the suspended reduction in rate to TM3  was
vacated, and you received a second NJP for absence from your
Punishment consisted of forfeitures of $100.
place of duty.
Your record remained clear of further disciplinary action until
when you received NJP for dereliction of duty.
6 December 1983,
Punishment imposed consisted of forfeitures of $100, with part
forfeitures being suspended for six months, and 5 days of extra
duty.

and were
Navy-

You were frocked to TM2 on 20

Your record further indicates that you participated in  
selected for advancement to TM2 from the September 1985  
wide Advancement Examination.
December 1985.
However, the recommendation for your advancement
was removed by the commanding officer on 31 March 1986, prior to
your advancement date due to your failure to maintain physical
fitness standards.
The enlisted performance evaluation for the
period of 14 August 1985 until 31 March 1986 indicates that you
received adverse (2.8) marks in initiative and the
recommendation for advancement was removed.
Due to these
adverse actions, this evaluation was forwarded to you for
comment.
corresponding statement from your commanding officer, indicates
that you were not maintaining physical fitness standards, which
resulted in removal of the advancement recommendation.
Your record shows that you served without further incident until
8 February 1989,
at which time you were honorably discharged at
the expiration of your term of enlistment.
were issued an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your active service
exceeding the high year tenure (HYT) limitations established for
your pay grade.

Your statement to this evaluation, with the

At that time, you

Regulations provided that the HYT limit for individuals serving
in pay grade E-4 was 10 years of active naval service.
Reenlistment beyond the HYT limit of 10 years was not authorized
and assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code was required.
you were treated no differently than others discharged under
similar circumstances, the Board could find no error or
injustice in your assigned reenlistment code.
concluded that the reenlistment code was proper and no change is
warranted.
The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
I

Accordingly, your application has been denied.

The Board

Since

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken.
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by

You are entitled to have

In this regard,

the Board.
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.

it is important to keep in mind that

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06967-01

    Original file (06967-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    6967-01 17 December 2001 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 Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 12 December 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were then advanced to TM2 (E-5) in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05130-02

    Original file (05130-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (NJP) for conspiracy, reckless driving, false The record further shows that you received NJP on 11 September 1984 for a seven day period of unauthorized absence, from 30 August to 6 September 1984. paygrade E-3. reduction to The punishment imposed was On 11 June 1985 you again received NJP for wrongful use of marijuana. However, the Board found that the other than honorable discharge NJP's and use of marijuana.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05144-02

    Original file (05144-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 4 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The punishment imposed was forfeitures of $100 per month On 30 January 1986 The Your record further shows that you received NJP for 21 days of unauthorized absence from 4 to 25 March 1986 and missing ship's movement. 1986 NMPC approved...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00050

    Original file (ND99-00050.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    TMSN (applicant) was well aware of the Navy's policy concerning drug abuse at the time of is drug involvement and does not possess the potential for further useful naval service. Therefore, I most strongly recommend that he be discharged from the naval service with an other than honorable discharge due to misconduct as evidenced by drug abuse and pattern of misconduct.920602: BUPERS directed the applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05106-02

    Original file (05106-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Bpard consisted Board. Reenlistment beyond the HYT limit of 10 years was not authorized and assignment of an RE-6 reenlistment code was required. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04644-02

    Original file (04644-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The punishment imposed was reduction Your record further shows that you received NJP on 14 February 1985 for wrongful use of marijuana. forfeitures of $310 per month for two months, 45 days of restriction and extra...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04606-02

    Original file (04606-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2003. 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. On 29 November...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00735-03

    Original file (00735-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 June 2003. 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. unanimously...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08061-08

    Original file (08061-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2009. 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 probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00592-05

    Original file (00592-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. 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...