Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01762-06
Original file (01762-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100        
                  CRS
 Docket No: 1762-06
8 November 2006


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 8 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.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 6 November 1981 after more than eight years of prior active service. A special court-martial convened on 19 September 1986 and found you guilty of an unauthorized absence of 523 days. The court sentenced you to confinement at hard labor for 75 days, reduction in rate and a bad conduct discharge. You received the bad conduct discharge on 20 October 1987. 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 personal problems. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change in the reason for discharge due to the fact that you were properly and appropriately convicted by court-martial of an unauthorized absence that lasted more than 17 months.
Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual receives a bad conduct discharge. 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 panelwill 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,



W.       DEAN PFEIFFER
 Executive Director































2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07081-05

    Original file (07081-05.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS» 2 NAVY ANNEX . Based on the foregoing, the Board concluded that no change to the discharge is warranted Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual receives a bad conduct discharge. 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 | 00196-09

    Original file (00196-09.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 August 2009. The Board noted that applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when a Sailor receives a punitive discharge. 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 | 02089-09

    Original file (02089-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2009. The bad conduct discharge was issued on 22 March 1982. In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed al] potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable Service in the Army and your contention in effect, that the Navy did not grant you the proper waiver for the RE-3 reenlistment code and consequently your enlistment in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08711-05

    Original file (08711-05.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 27 December 1984. With regard to your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09080-07

    Original file (09080-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2008. In this regard, there is no evidence that you previously received a general discharge. 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 | CY2006 | 06529-06

    Original file (06529-06.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 8 March 1983 at age 20. The Board concluded that the discharge was...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00243-09

    Original file (00243-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your : application on 23 September 2009. 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07075-06

    Original file (07075-06.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 September 2006. You received the bad conduct discharge on 7 July 1988, after completion of appellate review. In this regard, all of your sentence was approved by the CA, but the bad conduct discharge could not be executed prior to the completion of appellate review.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07180-08

    Original file (07180-08.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. An administrative discharge board met on 25 September 1992 and found that you should be discharged due to a pattern of misconduct with a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05602-01

    Original file (05602-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2001. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations 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...