Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01004-06
Original file (01004-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 TRG
Docket No: 1004-06
9 November2006

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 7 November 2006. 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.
You enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program of the Naval Reserve on 22 July 1997 and incurred an eight year military obligation from that date. On 14 July 1998, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18.
You then served in an excellent manner for over two years. However, on 20 October 2000 you received nonjudicial punishment for an unspecified period of unauthorized absence and disobedience.
On 28 February 2001, you received nonjudicial punishment for destruction of military property, breach of the peace and jumping from your ship into the water. On 7 March 2001, you received another nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence from 4 to 26 February 2001. The punishment imposed included a reduction to pay grade E-2. It is unclear from the record why you received two nonjudicial punishments, since all the offenses appear to be related. In this regard, you were an unauthorized absentee from 4 February 2001, which was apparently the same day you jumped from your ship.

 You then served in an excellent manner until you were separated with an honorable characterization of service on 4 August 2002, which is the expiration of your enlistment, as extended by the period of unauthorized absence. During this period, you were advanced to petty officer third class (BM3; E-4). At the time of your separation, you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, which means that you were not recommended for reenlistment.
Your last performance evaluation is not filed in your service record and is unavailable to the Board. However, the Board concluded that despite your periods of good service, a record which included three nonjudicial punishments for some serious offenses, was sufficient to support the assignment of the 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.



As indicated in the foregoing, the record shows that you enlisted in the delayed entry program on 22 July 1997 and incurred an eight-year military obligation from that date. Consequently, your discharge from the Navy should have occurred in August 2005, after the extension for your period of lost time. Therefore, it appears that any Navy records showing that you are obligated to serve until 2008 are in error.
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,






W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01840-01

    Original file (01840-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 2001. accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, considered your application on regulations and policies. only one...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07326-07

    Original file (07326-07.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.On 14 May 1997, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. On 30 November 2000, you received a psychiatric...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06009-07

    Original file (06009-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 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. Counsel contends that the camera angle falsely suggested that there was sexual activity on the beach and he believes that the Admiral overreacted...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00985-01

    Original file (00985-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 June 2001. 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 | CY2002 | 07478-01

    Original file (07478-01.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. Both the forfeitures and reduction were A 25 March 1992 Court However, the On the A page 9 entry shows that you were assigned adverse marks of 2.6 in military bearing and personal behavior for the reporting period 1 February to 16 October 1992, and you were not recommended for reenlistment. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05882-00

    Original file (05882-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Marine Corps filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a more favorable reenlistment code than the RE-4 code now of record. supports the decision not to authorize reenlistment since he probably was not promotable with the nonjudicial punishment in However, the Board further believes that Petitioner the record. Accordingly, the Board concludes that the RE-4 The...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03872-01

    Original file (03872-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 5 October 1999, AO2(AW/SW) (Petitioner) (then a frocked Chief Petty Officer) called the house of a shipmate, EM3 (B). a verbal argument over the phone, which ended when ENFN (A) gave (Petitioner) the address to EM3 (B's) house. commanding officer at the NJP and that of the ADB.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10130-07

    Original file (10130-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 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. 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 | CY2008 | 06924-08

    Original file (06924-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. 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 | CY2001 | 02287-01

    Original file (02287-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 August 2001. 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 found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of misconduct which...