Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09655-05
Original file (09655-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTONDC2O37O5 -510 0

                  CRS
 Docket No: 9655-05
12 January 2007








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 on 5 January 2007. 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 31 January 1989. The record reflects that on 19 March 1991 you were counseled as to your failure to pay numerous just debts. On 20 October 1991 you were convicted by civil authorities of assault and battery on your wife. The court sentenced you to confinement for 90 days with 70 days suspended. On 22 November 1991 you received nonjudicial punishment for making a false official statement and an unauthorized absence of nine days.
On 26 August 1992 your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. When informed of the 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 15 October 1992 you received an other than honorable 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. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of the discharge, given your frequent misconduct which resulted in a civil conviction and nonjudicial punishment.



Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to 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,


ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Copy to:         The American Legion

















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01655-07

    Original file (01655-07.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 2 December 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. You...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09544-06

    Original file (09544-06.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 7 August 1989 at age 18. On 6 March 1992 you were so discharged and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00692-02

    Original file (00692-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2002. 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 together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, Your allegations of error and After careful and conscientious consideration of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 10095-04

    Original file (10095-04.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2005. 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 | CY2009 | 04571-09

    Original file (04571-09.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. On 31 July 1991, you received NUP for drunk and disorderly conduct. 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 | CY2008 | 03441-08

    Original file (03441-08.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 January 2009. 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 9 December 1992, the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation, but the separation action was subsequently suspended due to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07508-07

    Original file (07508-07.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 19 March 1990 at age 25. on 3 April 1990 you were convicted by civil...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07805-06

    Original file (07805-06.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 Reserve on 26 June 1990 at age 21 and began a two year period of active...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13

    Original file (NR2510-13.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 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03064-10

    Original file (03064-10.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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...