Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08705-00
Original file (08705-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD 

FOFI  CORRECTION OF

 

NA’IAL  RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WI\SHINGTON  DC 20370.510

0

TJR
Docket No: 8705-00
11 June 2001

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provision:; 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 5 June 2001..
injustice were reviewed in accordance  
applicable to the proceedings of this
regulations and procedures
Board.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
applic,able statutes, regulations,
thereof, your naval record,
and policies.

Your allegations of error and
'dith administrative

and 

After careful and conscientious  
record, the Board found the evidence  
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

consid'aration  of the entire

s,Jbmitted was insufficient

Your record reflects that on 2 February 1995 you

The Board found you enlisted in the  
the age of 20.
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a
lawful order.
pay and restriction and extra duty for 45 days.
1995 a civil court found that you had improperly failed to pay
rent.
ordered to pay $551.25 and court costs.

A deferred judgment was entered against you, and you were

The punishment imposed was a $790.20 forfeiture of

Na,uy on 21 October 1994 at

On 7 December

Your record further reflects that on 24 April 1997 you were
notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense as evidenced by
self admitted spousal abuse.
you submitted a written statement in rebuttal to the discharge.
The commanding officer recommended you be issued a general
discharge by reason of misconduct.
approved this recommendation and directed a general discharge by
reason of misconduct due   to commission of a serious offense, and
on 9 May 1997 you were so discharged.

After consulting with legal counsel

The discharge authority

enti:ce record and application,

narrati.re reason for separation and

war.rant a change in the

specifically, your spousal

However, the Board concluded these factors and

The Board, in its review of your 
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and your contention that because of
your divorce proceedings your  
reenlistment code should be changed to hardship and RE-3,
respectively.
contention were not sufficient to  
narrative reason for separation or reenlistment code because of
the serious nature of your misconduct,
abuse.
Further, the Board noted that there is no evidence in your
record, and you submitted none, to 
support your contention.
an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct, an RE-4
reenlistment code is required.
your case, the Board concluded your  
separation and reenlistment code were proper and no change is
warranted.

The Board also noted the other misconduct of record.

Given all the circumstances of

n,arrative reason for

Accordingly, your application has been denied.

When

 

’

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 suomission 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 | CY2007 | 00505-07

    Original file (00505-07.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 13 July 1995 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident until 9...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01205

    Original file (MD02-01205.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-01205 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020823, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed. The Board will determine which reason for discharge should have been assigned based upon the facts and circumstances before the Board, including the service regulations governing the reasons for discharge at that time, to determine whether relief is warranted. Applicant was...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00642

    Original file (MD03-00642.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Sep 21 09_17_36 CDT 2000

    Further, other individuals stated that you did not notify the command until the third duty day after the arrest. You contend that the arrest was reported on the first day back to work; you were directed not to have any contact with anyone on board the submarine, and therefore could not obtain any witnesses; the executive officer threatened further adverse action if you appealed the NJP; and you were told that you would receive additional alcohol rehabilitation prior to discharge. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00772-01

    Original file (00772-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 May 2001. The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 18 December 1991 after about ten years of prior active service. 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 war,ranted.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05881-01

    Original file (05881-01.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. Personnel, your commanding officer recommended against separation action. The Chief of Naval Personnel then recommended to the Secretary of the Navy that your request be approved, discharged by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00847

    Original file (MD03-00847.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD03-00847 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20030407. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Letter from Applicant’s wife Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07580-01

    Original file (07580-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2001. 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03943-99

    Original file (03943-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Though Petitioner's BCNR case file does not establish Petitioner's actual notice of the current version of DOD Directive 1010.4, the fact Petitioner's rehabilitative potential was affirmatively considered and assessed prior to his discharge makes resolution of this issue unnecessary. Application to Petitioner's case. drug use was evidenced by a urinalysis for methamphetamine and Petitioner's further drug use following a second positive urinalysis in Petitioner's history of drug use and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09225-07

    Original file (09225-07.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 November 2008. 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. However, on 9 June 1995, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty.