Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08709-06
Original file (08709-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~5 100


TRG
         Docket No: 8709—06
         25 February 2008




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.

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 13 January 2000 at age 20. You then served without incident until 15 July 2002. On that date YOU received nonjudicial punishment for making a false official statement. On 5 October 2002 you began a period of unauthorized absence which lasted until you surrendered on 2 July 2004, a period of about 628 days.
Based on the 628 day period of unauthorized absence, you were processed for an administrative discharge by reason of misconduct. In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board. After review, the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions and you were so discharged on 22 July 2004. At that time, you were not recommended for reenlistment and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to again serve in the military. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your lengthy period of unauthorized absence. The Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.




Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct. Since you have been treated no differently than others discharged for that reason, the Board could not find an error or injustice in 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.
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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06659-06

    Original file (06659-06.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 31 March 1998 after about five years of prior service. You elected to...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 07490-01

    Original file (07490-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The On 5 The Based on the diagnosed personality disorder, you were processed for an administrative discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01549-03

    Original file (01549-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2003. 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 | 08762-08

    Original file (08762-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03764-09

    Original file (03764-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2010. 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. On 6 January 2004, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03845-07

    Original file (03845-07.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 25 July 2000 at age 19. Because you requested discharge in lieu of trial,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00324-03

    Original file (00324-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2003. An advisory opinion from the Navy Personnel Command dated 26 March 2003, stated that your claim of forged signatures on the 27 March 2002 page 13 counseling and warning entry could not be confirmed. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7833 13

    Original file (NR7833 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2014. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 19 April .1996, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00475-05

    Original file (00475-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2005. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 19 July 2002 you were discharged with an other than honorable discharge by reason of 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...