DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
CRS
Docket No: 4364-03
16 June 2003
o'n 11 June 2003.
Your allegations of error and
The offenses included an unauthorized absence and
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
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
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
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
1999.
The record reflects that you received two nonjudicial
punishments.
assault.
On 29 July 2002 the commanding officer recommended that you be
separated with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to
a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense.
When informed of this recommendation,
you elected to waive the
right to submit a statement in response to the discharge action.
After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for
separation was approved and on 21 August 2002 you received a
general discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct.
of RE-4.
Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to
misconduct.
At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code
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.
The names and
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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
Enclosure
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00324-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. An advisory opinion from the Navy Personnel Command dated 26 March 2003, stated that your claim of forged signatures on the 27 March 2002 page 13 counseling and warning entry could not be confirmed. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02889-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 ~ p r i l 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. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 2 March 2002 you received a general discharge by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09809-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 2002. When informed of the recommendation, you elected to On 29 September 2001 At that time, you The offenses included waive the right to present your case to an administrative After review by the discharge authority, the Since you have been treated no differently than the Board could not find an error or The names and Applicable regulations require the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01088-03
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2003. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct. 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 | CY2003 | 06344-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05178-06
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. In addition, the Board considered the letter furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 25 September 2003, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08999-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 2008. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09559-05
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 25 October 2001. After review by the discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03505-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 23 February 2001 you received a general discharge by reason of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09801-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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...