Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 07611-03
Original file (07611-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




 TJR
 Docket No: 7611-03
9 August 2004

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 3 August 2004. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to est ablish he exploit of probable rnat erial error or injustice

You enlisted in the Navy on 29 September 2000 at age 21 and served without disciplinary incident until 26 October 2001, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed place of duty, insubordination, and failure to obey a lawful order. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-2, restriction for 60 days, and a $610 forfeiture of pay. A portion of the punishment was suspended for six months. However, on 30 November 2001, the suspended punishment was vacated due to your continued misconduct.
On 13 February 2002 you received NJP for failure to obey a lawful order and making a false official statement. The punishment imposed was reduction to paygrade E-1, a $620 forfeiture of pay, and restriction for 60 days, 30 days of which was suspended.
On 25 February 2001 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. At that time you waived your right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board. On 1 April 2002 your commanding officer recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. On 17 April 12002 the discharge authority then directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct and on 24 April 2002 you were so discharged and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all mitigating factors, such as your youth, post service conduct, and your claim that you did not want to leave the military and would like a second chance to serve your country. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change in the reenlistment code or narrative reason for separation because of your repetitive misconduct. Further, an individual separated by reason of misconduct must receive an RE-4 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,










Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06700-01

    Original file (06700-01.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. 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. On 25 February 1993 you received your fourth NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01232-01

    Original file (01232-01.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. in support of your contention, evidence. 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 | CY2007 | 06323-07

    Original file (06323-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The reporting senior stated, in part, as follows: (Member) requires direct supervision to get satisfactory results.... he takes no ownership of any actions and constantly makes excuses for his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05149-01

    Original file (05149-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your record also reflects that on 9 December 1974 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for two periods of UA totalling four days, absence from your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02752-02

    Original file (02752-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. contentions were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of your repeated misconduct, which continued until a month before your released from active duty, Further, there is no and resulted in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04906-01

    Original file (04906-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 December 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. The Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02772-02

    Original file (02772-02.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 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. for 14 days and a $20 forfeiture of pay. 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 | 05149-03

    Original file (05149-03.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You reenlisted in the Navy on 14 November 1980 after three years of prior honorable service. On that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03355-02

    Original file (03355-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The forfeitures, extra duty and restriction were On 5 August 1998, you were notified that separation action was being initiated by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. Consequently, when applying for a correction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02092-08

    Original file (02092-08.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because of your disciplinary record which resulted in two NUPs, failure of professional growth criteria, and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when...