Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 01771-98
Original file (01771-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
D E P A R T M E N T  O F  T H E  N A V Y  
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 

2 N A W  ANNEX 

WASHINGTON DC  20370-5100 

CRS 
Docket No:  1771-98 
28 June 1999 

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 23 June 1999.  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, 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. 

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 29 September 
1987 at age 24.  Your record reflects that you received four 
nonjudicial punishments.  The offenses included unauthorized 
absences totalling at least two days, disorderly conduct, 
fighting, failure to obey a lawful order on two occasions, 
disrespect, possession of a controlled substance, drunkenness, 
and drunk and disorderly conduct. 

While the discharge processing documents are not available, it 
appears that the commanding officer then recommended that you be 
separated with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to 
commission of a serious offense.  After review by the discharge 
authority, the recommendation was approved.  Your DD Form 214 
clearly shows that you were separated on 14 February 1990 with a 
general discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a 
serious offense. 

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all 
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity 

and the contention that you were innocent of the drug charge. 
However, the Board concluded that these factors were not 
sufficient to warrant upgrading your discharge.  In this regard, 
there is no evidence in the record to support your contention of 
innocence, and you submitted no such evidence.  Therefore, the 
Board concluded that no change to the discharge is warranted. 

Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code 
when an individual is discharged due to misconduct.  Since you 
have been treated no differently than others in your situation, 
the Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment 
of your reenlistment code. 

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 | CY1998 | NC9801771

    Original file (NC9801771.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 1999. 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Sep 21 09_17_53 CDT 2000

    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 record reflects that you received four The offenses included unauthorized While the discharge processing documents are not available, it appears that the commanding officer then recommended that you be separated with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08785-98

    Original file (08785-98.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 June 1999. 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 | CY1999 | 00575-99

    Original file (00575-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 1999. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01747-05

    Original file (01747-05.rtf) 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 9 February 1999 at age 23. After review, the discharge authority...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03242-99

    Original file (03242-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 1999. 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. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your extensive...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02325-99

    Original file (02325-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of submitted in support your application, together with all thereof, your naval record, and regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious considera ion of the entire record, the Board found the evidence subm'tted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable ma erial error or injustice. The discharge authority then directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06784-03

    Original file (06784-03.rtf) 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy for four years on 16 July 1994 as a petty officer fir. However, on 28...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02068-99

    Original file (02068-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. 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 | CY2006 | 05767-06

    Original file (05767-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board also considered the advisory opinion from Headquarters Marine Corps dated 26 June 2006, a copy of which is attached.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 Marine Corps on 30 June 1997. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...