Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06721-07
Original file (06721-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



 SJN
 Docket No: 06721-07
2 June 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.
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2008. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 31 May 2001 at age 18. On 1 June 2003, you were arrested and charged with reckless driving and driving while intoxicated. On 13 June 2003, you were only convicted of reckless driving. During the period from 18 June 2003 to 3 April 2004, you received four nonjudicial punishments (NJP’s) for making a false official statement, four instances of disobedience, sleeping on watch, two brief periods of unauthorized absence (UA), and insubordinate conduct. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
On 6 April 2004, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. You elected to consult with legal counsel and subsequently requested an administrative discharge board (ADB).
 On 16 April 2004, an ADB, unanimously found that you had committed misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and recommended a general discharge. Your commanding officer concurred with the ADB and forwarded your case to the discharge authority for review. On 11 May 2004, the discharge authority directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct. On 28 May 2004 you were so discharged. At that time you were 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, overall record of service, and post service accomplishments. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your reenlistment code given your record of four NJP’s, civil conviction, and the fact that you were counseled and warned about the consequences of further misconduct. Finally, an RE—4 reenlistment code must be assigned to any service member discharged by reason of misconduct. 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 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,

                  W. DEAN PFEIFFER
 Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00965-10

    Original file (00965-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 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 5 August 1987, the ADB unanimously recommended separation with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1200059

    Original file (MD1200059.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief granted.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries, and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall and the narrative reason for separation shall change to.The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10123-07

    Original file (10123-07.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct that continued after you were repeatedly warned that further infractions could result in an OTH discharge. ...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001742

    Original file (ND1001742.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT Applicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities.

  • USMC | DRB | 2011_Marine | MD1101922

    Original file (MD1101922.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s Request:Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive:USMCR (DEP)20070306 - 20070318Active: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Current Enlistment: 20070319Age at Enlistment: Period of Enlistment: Years MonthsDate of Discharge:20100622Highest Rank:Length of Service: Years Months04 DaysEducation Level: AFQT:71MOS: 7234Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions):()/()Fitness Reports: Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):Rifle...

  • USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201274

    Original file (MD1201274.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administrative board voted 3-0 that the preponderance of the evidence supported the Applicant had a pattern of misconduct and recommended separation with a characterization Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13

    Original file (NR2510-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5412 13

    Original file (NR5412 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 19 June 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR477 14

    Original file (NR477 14.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 January 2015. 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. You were so discharged on 21 May 1986.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2013_Navy | ND1301397

    Original file (ND1301397.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...