Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06737-07
Original file (06737-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
                           SJN
                                                                                          Docket No: 06737-07
                                                                                          9 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 4 June 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 6 September 2002 at age 17. On 8 April 2003, you were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and recommended of separation. However, on 17 April 2003, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disobedience, making a false official statement, destruction of government property, and making provoking speeches or gestures. You received a reduction in paygrade, restriction, and extra duty.
On 18 April 2003, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. You elected to consult counsel and subsequently submitted a statement on your behalf, and requested a general court-martial convening authority (GCMCA) review of your case.
On 13 June 2003, your commanding officer forwarded his recommendation to the discharge authority, recommending that you be discharged under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. On 25 June 2003, the GCMCA concurred and directed that you be discharged. You received a general discharge on 16 July 2003. 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 and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code because of your NJP for serious offenses. In this regard, the RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. 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 PFIEFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06721-07

    Original file (06721-07.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 31 May 2001 at age 18. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05732-07

    Original file (05732-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 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. 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 | CY2007 | 08019-07

    Original file (08019-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 October 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10212-02

    Original file (10212-02.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 September 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. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required wher Nevertheless, the Board concluded these On 29 April 1992 your On 4 June 1992 the It further...

  • 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 | CY2014 | NR5634 14

    Original file (NR5634 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 19 May 2015. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case, given the seriousness of your misconduct and you were not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05231-07

    Original file (05231-07.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 22 July 1998 at age 19. It also appears that when notified of this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05633-07

    Original file (05633-07.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 12 June 2006 at age 18. Your commanding officer stated, in part, that you...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07574-07

    Original file (07574-07.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 23 July 1986 at age 18. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06323-07

    Original file (06323-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The reporting senior stated, in part, as follows: (Member) requires direct supervision to get satisfactory results.... he takes no ownership of any actions and constantly makes excuses for his...