Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08369-06
Original file (08369-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 SJN
Docket No: 08369-06
15 March 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 14 March 2007. Your allegations of error and injustice were r eviewed 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 13 April 2004 at age 20. On 2 August 2005 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for being drunk on duty. You received a reduction in paygrade, a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duties.
Administrative discharge action was then initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of serious offense and alcohol rehabilitation failure. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 12 August 2005, your commanding officer (CO) forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. He stated, in part, that despite counseling and warnings, you continued to commit misconduct, were unwilling to adhere to the rules and regulations, and were unwilling to conduct yourself in a manner conducive to good order and discipline. On 22 August 2005 the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 31 August 2005 you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the RE-4 reenlistment code because of your NJP and the discharge by reason of misconduct. An RE-4 reenlistment code is required under such circumstances. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). You my apply to NDRB 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 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 | CY2007 | 02348-07

    Original file (02348-07.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 20 March 2006, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. Apparently, the separation authority approved...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02348-07

    Original file (02348-07.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 20 March 2006, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. Apparently, the separation authority approved...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06293-06

    Original file (06293-06.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 31 August 2004 at age 19 and served without disciplinary incident until 21...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2007_Navy | ND0700468

    Original file (ND0700468.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Despite a servicemember’s prior record of service certain serious offenses warrant separation from the naval service in order to maintain proper order and discipline. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years from the date of discharge. Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02327-07

    Original file (02327-07.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 28 November 2000, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. On 27 January 2004, you were so discharged...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01067 12

    Original file (01067 12.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. Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06885-06

    Original file (06885-06.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. Such a code is required when Sailors are separated 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 | CY2007 | 05727-07

    Original file (05727-07.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. The Board did not consider whether the characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09776-09

    Original file (09776-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your haval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501299

    Original file (ND0501299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application: “I would like to upgrade my discharge and re-enter naval service. Charge: violation of the UCMJ, Article 132: Specification: Did, on or about 6 October 1989, presenting a DD Form 1351-2, Travel Voucher, and a DD Form 1351-4. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards