Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09602-02
Original file (09602-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE  NAVY 

BOARD  FOR  C O R R E C T I O N  O F  NAVAL  R E C O R D S  

2   NAVY  ANNEX 

W A S H I N G T O N   DC  2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

WMF' 
Docket No:  9602-02 
1 May 2003 

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 30 April 2003.  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, 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 Naval Reserve on 24 
November 1993 and, on 8 February 1994, began a 36 month period 
of active duty.  The record reflects that you served without 
incident until 10 June 1996, when you received nonjudicial 
punishment  (NJP) for incapacitation for duty due to drunkenness. 
The punishment imposed was forfeitures of $427 per month for two 
months, 30 days of restriction and extra duty, and a reduction 
in rate to firemen recruit (FR; E-1) . 
On 29 October 1996 you received NJP for three instances of being 
disrespectful in language and assault.  The punishment imposed 
was a forfeiture of $404 and 30 days of restriction and extra 
duty. 

On 2 November 1996 you received an adverse enlisted performance 
evaluation upon your separation, for the period 16 July to 2 
November 1996.  In this evaluation, you received adverse marks 
of 2.0 in the marking categories of professional knowledge, 
military bearing/character, personal job 
accomplishment/initiative and teamwork.  The overall evaluation 
mark was 2.33.  Your commanding officer did not recommend you 
for retention and your were progressing towards an advancement 
recommendation. 

On 7 December 1996, you were honorably released from active 
duty, transferred to the Naval Reserve due to reduction in 
force, and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. 

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed 
all potentially mitigating factors including your contention 
that you were forced to sign an incorrect DD Form 214 that 
indicated that you were an fireman recruit (FR; E-l), and not 
fireman apprentice (FA; E-2).  However, the Board concluded that 
your DD Form 214 was correct based on your reduction in rate 
during the NJP of 10 June 1996 and the fact that your record 
does not show that you were advanced to E-2 after this date or 
prior to your separation.  Furthermore, the Board found that 
your reenlistment code was appropriately assigned given your two 
NJP1s, and because regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 
reenlistment code to all individuals who are released from 
active duty in paygrades E-2 and below.  Accordingly, your 
application has been denied.  The names and votes of the members 
of the panel will be furnished upon request. 

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 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06278-02

    Original file (06278-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2003. The letter of 27 March 1986 that notified you that the request was denied stated that your "statements clearly demonstrate that your request for discharge (was) based on dissatisfaction with the naval service and not by reason of conscientious objector beliefs." Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09632-02

    Original file (09632-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel o$ the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2003. Although the documents concerning your separation processing are not contained in your records, it is clear that you were processed for separation by reason of fraudulent entry due to your failure to disclose pre-service medical treatment and diagnosed personality disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08493-01

    Original file (08493-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. On 20 October 1995 you were notified that separation action was being initiated due to the diagnosed personality disorder. 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 | 06700-01

    Original file (06700-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 25 February 1993 you received your fourth NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07620-02

    Original file (07620-02.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 May 2003. 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03392-01

    Original file (03392-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2002. The members of the chain of command were present, made statements and were available to answer questions . He then told LT HI who then called Ms. D. The Board also considered the statement of the retired chief petty officer who stated that you were not derelict in your duties while you were treating him and that he did not see any disrespect.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00133-02

    Original file (00133-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materizl submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 29 April 1992 the separation action was forwarded to the Chief of Naval Personnel for final action and on 5 June 1992, your discharge was directed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06070-01

    Original file (06070-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 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. On 26 March 1996, this Board denied your requests for further recharacterization of your service, and changes in your narrative reason for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10975-02

    Original file (10975-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 2 0 0 3 . 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. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and on 26 June 1984 you received an other than honorable discharge in lieu of trial by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08750-02

    Original file (08750-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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