Last saved by: terry.bynum

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00

TJR
Docket No: 5633-07
9 April 2008

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 of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulation 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.

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.

You enlisted in the Navy on 12 June 2006 at age 18. Shortly thereafter, on 18 July 2006, an incident report stated, in part, that you were a participant in sexual harassment and impeding an investigation. As a result, on 25 July 2006, you received nonjudic~a~ punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order as evidenced by engaging in inappropriate behavior/sexual harassment that was detrimental to the training environment, and obstructing justice as evidenced by impeding an investigation by influencing witnesses’ statements. The punishment imposed was extra duty and restriction for 45 days and a $1,178.10 forfeiture of pay.

On 28 July 2006 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. At that, time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and did not object to the separation. Your commanding officer stated, in part, that you were found guilty at NJP and awarded punishment in a fair and just manner, and that due to your actions separation was clearly warranted.
Subsequently,on 1 August 2006, the discharge authority directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and on 4 August 2006 you were so separated from the Navy and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to reenlist in the armed forces. ‘It also considered your assertion that the charges for which you received NJP were unjustified. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of the seriousness of your misconduct. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is separated by reason of misconduct, not recommended for reenlistment or retention, and/or failure to complete recruit training. Finally, there is documented evidence in the record that is contrary to your assertion. 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