Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08569-06
Original file (08569-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                                             DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
 2 NAVY ANNEX
 WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

         CRS
 Docket No: 8569-06
 16 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 4 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 2 May 2000. The record reflects that you were an unauthorized absentee from 14 June to 3 July 2002, a total of 19 days. You were also an unauthorized absentee from 7 July to 6 August 2002, a total of 29 days.
On 8 April 2003 you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for an unauthorized absence of 214 days. Prior to submitting this request you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. Your request was granted and, as a result of this action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor. You received the other than honorable discharge on 12 May 2003. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged in lieu of court-martial. 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.






The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). You may 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,


 ROBERT D . ZSALMAN
 Acting Executive Director
Enclosure




















2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08185-05

    Original file (08185-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2005. Although the request for discharge is not in your record, it appears that you subsequently requested an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of absence. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02156-07

    Original file (02156-07.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 11 October 2001 at age 17. However, the reason for discharge entered...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09325-02

    Original file (09325-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record appears to indicate that you were confined during the period of 6 to 30 December 1999. Therefore it appears that although you were not an unauthorized absentee during this period, time lost since you were serving the confinement adjudged at the The names SCM. 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 | CY2002 | 00008-02

    Original file (00008-02.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 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09403-02

    Original file (09403-02.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09145-06

    Original file (09145-06.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.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 1 June 1972. On 11 October 1974 you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03356-08

    Original file (03356-08.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 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. Your military record shows that you submitted a written request for a discharge under other than honorable conditions in order to avoid trial by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05178-06

    Original file (05178-06.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. In addition, the Board considered the letter furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) dated 25 September 2003, a copy of which is attached.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00406-02

    Original file (00406-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04912-02

    Original file (04912-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. It was recommended that you be processed On 8 May 1978 you received a On 2 June 1978 you were notified that separation action was being initiated by reason of unsuitability due to your diagnosed personality disorder. ...