Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 03999-04
Original file (03999-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT F THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTI OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTON 20370-5100
Docket No: 3999-04








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 Boar for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive se ion, considered your application on 4 August 2004. Y r 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 1 material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
After caref ul and c onscientious co nside r ation of the enti re 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 en titled September 1998. The record ref lets that o 14 April 2000 you received nonjudicial punishment for drivi ng under the influence, possession of marijuana, and possession of a false driver’s license.
Although your record does not co am the separation documents, it appears that the commanding o icer recommended that you be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse and, after review by the discharge authority, the recommendation fo separation was approved. The record clearly shows that on 20 De cember 2000 you received an other than honorable discharge. t that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
Applicable regulations require t assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an indivi du al is discharged due to misconduct. Since you have been reacted no differently than others in your situation, the Bo d could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of y ur reenlistment code. Accordingly, your application ha been denied. The names and votes of the members of the pane will be furnished upon request.
The Board did not consider wheth e r your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration a d you have not exhausted your administrative remedy by applyin g to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). You may apply to DRB by submitting the attached DD Form 293.




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 up n submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important o keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attach s to all official records. Consequently, when applying for correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the app l icant to demonstrate the existence of probable material e ror or injustice.
Sincerely,





Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00580-02

    Original file (00580-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 23 February 1988 for three years. The Board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code since you were treated no differently than others discharged under similar circumstances.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01227-01

    Original file (01227-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. 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 | 04234-02

    Original file (04234-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2002. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to 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 | CY2002 | 02065-02

    Original file (02065-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00711-02

    Original file (00711-02.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 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 | CY2000 | 06134-00

    Original file (06134-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. * You were advanced to RM3 (E-4), extended your enlistment for an additional period of four months, and served without further incident until 15 March 1982, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of marijuana. Counsel also noted that the senior member of the ADB was not an 0-4 line officer.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08181-01

    Original file (08181-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy 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. Since you have been treated no differently than others separated under similar circumstances, the Board could find no error or injustice in your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07880-01

    Original file (07880-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. You were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | CY2001 | 08735-01

    Original file (08735-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY1999 | 02198-99

    Original file (02198-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. The career planner noted that although you were recommended for reenlistment in June 1991 by your previous CO, you were ineligible due to the four NJPs and should receive an RE-3C reenlistment code. The reenlistment code was assigned by the CO, not by the career planner.