Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00473-07
Original file (00473-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

                                     2 NAVY ANNEX
 WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100       


         CR S
Docket No: 473-07
21 February 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 31 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 30 November 1999. The record reflects that on 1 December 2003 you received nonjudicial punishment for failure to obey a lawful order.
On 17 December 2003 your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you be separated with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Your CO stated that you had refused the anthrax vaccination on two occasions. When informed of your CO’s recommendation, you elected to waive the right to submit a statement in response to the discharge action. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 19 December 2003 you received a general discharge by reason of misconduct. 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 due to misconduct. 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,



 Enclosure

























2

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2007 | 00193-07

    Original file (00193-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 July 2007. The Board did not consider whether the reason for separation should be changed since you did not request such action and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00663-07

    Original file (00663-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2007. 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 | CY2006 | 06627-06

    Original file (06627-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 2007. 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 | CY2005 | 06051-05

    Original file (06051-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2005. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04212-07

    Original file (04212-07.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 6 January 2003, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. not consider whether the reason for separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08766-06

    Original file (08766-06.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 Navy Reserve on 21 November 1996 and reported to active...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03400-03

    Original file (03400-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08569-06

    Original file (08569-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10671-06

    Original file (10671-06.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.On 19 February 2002 you enlisted in the Navy at age 22. However, both evaluations recommended your...