Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04237-06
Original file (04237-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                    2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5100


                                    TRG
         Docket No: 4237-06
        31 October 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 23 October 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.
You enlisted in the Navy on 8 December 1998 at age 30. Although your record is incomplete it appears that you served without incident until 15 March 2001. On that date, you received nonjudicial punishment for an unspecified period of unauthorized absence and disobedience. There is no further record of misconduct filed in your record, On 15 April 2004, you were notified of separation processing by reason of misconduct. You were informed that the least favorable characterization of service would be a general discharge. Your commanding officer stated in his recommendation for your discharge, in part, as follows:
[His] criminal acts, which form the basis of his separation, are part of an ongoing course of conduct that is unacceptable for any service member to engage in. [He] has shown a continued defiance towards authority through repeated unauthorized absences and a failure to properly respond to direction. He has been counseled about his behavior on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, he has shown, through his reluctance to change his performance and attitude, that he is unwilling to accept positive mentorship and corrective
 measures. Accordingly, i have determined that the offenses committed were serious, that here is a strong likelihood of recurrence...
On 28 May 2004, the general court-martial convening authority (GCMCA) directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct and you were so discharged on 15 June 2004.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors, such as your length of service, the incomplete record and the documentation you submitted that shows you have severe allergies. You contend, in effect, that allergic reactions led to your inability to adjust to naval service and that your offenses were relatively minor. The Board found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the comments of the commanding officer which suggest that you had committed numerous instances of relatively serious misconduct. Further, the discharge package was reviewed by the GCMCA who believed that you had committed misconduct warranting discharge. The Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
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,




W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600023

    Original file (MD0600023.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1 and 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USMCR (DEP) 20010919 - 20010924 COG Active: None Period...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01461

    Original file (MD03-01461.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was inequitable because the conduct upon which it is based has been mitigated by overall good service and a demonstration that the alleged conduct was fabricated and untrue.2. G_ (Applicant) requests a discharge upgrade because the General Discharge is based only on alleged conduct that is mitigated by overall good service. G_ (Applicant)’s.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08967-05

    Original file (08967-05.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his endorsement on your appeal CSG2 analyzed the evidence concerning the charge of indecent assault and stated that he believed a preponderance of the evidence supported his finding of guilty. He conceded that the evaluation at issue was erroneously prepared and indicated that action would be taken to file a corrected evaluation but strongly recommended that your application for advancement to chief petty officer be denied. The opinion concluded by stating that given the no misconduct...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500784

    Original file (MD0500784.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Issues, as stated Issues submitted by Applicant and representative: “ The applicant was administratively released from his Marine Corp Unit for misconduct (Drug Abuse) and awarded an Other Than Honorable (OTH) discharge. 040105: GCMCA [Commanding General, Fourth Marine Division, New Orleans, LA] informed Commandant of the Marine Corps that Applicant...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00508

    Original file (MD04-00508.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00508 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040203. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. [On July 23 a warrant for your arrest on two cases of issuance of a worthless check, case numbers issued by the Onslow County Sherifffs Department are #02CR 055017 and #02CR 056426.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR12712 14

    Original file (NR12712 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board, in its review of your record and application, which included your counsel’s brief, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to upgrade your other than honorable discharge, to be reinstated in the military, and change your narrative reason for separation/separation code and reenlistment code. In this regard, the Board determined that your desires and your counsel’s allegations were not enough to outweigh the significant misconduct you committed. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1000741

    Original file (ND1000741.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00240-03

    Original file (00240-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 October 2003. When the sole basis for separation is a serious offense that resulted in a conviction by a special or general court-martial that did not impose a punitive discharge, and an Other Than Honorable discharge is warranted. d. When an Administrative Board finds that a preponderance of the evidence supports one or more of the reasons for separation...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01447

    Original file (MD04-01447.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-01447 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040913. The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. [… Absent himself without proper authority...] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.960422: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under honorable conditions (general) for the convenience...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501320

    Original file (ND0501320.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to entry level separation or uncharacterized. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Applicant’s DD Form 215 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 19990630 – 19991129 COG Active: USN 19991130...