DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 7914-01
11 April 2002
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 10 April 2002. 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 8 June 1995 at
age 19. The record reflects that on 22 May 1996 you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for two instances of disrespect.
On 7 December 1996 the commanding officer recommended that you be
separated with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. He further stated that in
addition to the NJP, you failed to obey a lawful order on four
occasions. When informed of this recommendation, you elected to
waive the right to present your case to an administrative
discharge board. After review by the discharge authority, the
recommendation for separation was approved and on 10 January 1997
you received a general discharge by reason of misconduct. At
that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
immaturity. However, the Board concluded that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge,
given your record of six offenses. Therefore, the Board
concluded that no change to the discharge is warranted.
Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02161-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 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. 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 | 07215-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting &in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06070-01
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 | 00711-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 21 May 1998 you received a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00784-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. 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 | 08493-01
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 | CY2002 | 03198-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2002. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00406-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08034-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 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. 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 | CY2002 | 02682-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2002. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...