DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
TJR
Docket No: 9225-07
6 November 2008
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 5 November 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 1 June 1994 at age 18 and served for
a year without disciplinary incident. However, on 9 June 1995,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to
your appointed place of duty. The punishment imposed was extra
duty and restriction for 45 days and a $501.15 forfeiture of pay.
On 2 February and again on 12 December 1996 you received NJP for
Carrying a concealed weapon, drunkenness, and failure to obey a
lawful order.
On 15 December 1996 you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense, a pattern of misconduct, and alcohol rehabilitation
failure. After consulting with legal counsel you elected to
present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
26 December 1996 an ADB recommended an honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, a
pattern of misconduct, and alcohol rehabilitation failure.
However, on 18 January 1997, your commanding officer concurred
with the ADB regarding discharge, but recommended discharge under
honorable conditions by reason of misconduct. On 4 February 1997
the discharge authority approved the recommendations for
discharge but stated, in part, that although an honorable
discharge was in no way warranted, the Navy could not award a
less than favorable characterization of service than that awarded
by an ADB. As such the discharge authority directed an honorable
discharge by reason of misconduct, and on 24 February 1997, you
were so discharged and 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 desire to change your reenlistment code because it
is contradictory to your honorable characterization of service.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant a change of the reenlistment code because
of your frequent and repetitive misconduct which resulted in
three NJPs. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when
a Sailor is discharged by reason of misconduct and is not
recommended for reenlistment. Finally, Sailors discharged by
reason of misconduct would normally receive discharges under
other than honorable conditions. In this regard, you were
fortunate to receive an honorable discharge. 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,
LaWeen$
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di Oo
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Sep 21 09_17_36 CDT 2000
Further, other individuals stated that you did not notify the command until the third duty day after the arrest. You contend that the arrest was reported on the first day back to work; you were directed not to have any contact with anyone on board the submarine, and therefore could not obtain any witnesses; the executive officer threatened further adverse action if you appealed the NJP; and you were told that you would receive additional alcohol rehabilitation prior to discharge. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 07727-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considere@a your -application on 2 August 2011. 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 these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02574-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00801-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. Your record reflects that prior to your reenlistment you had four convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) and had completed in-patient (level 111) alcohol rehabilitation treatment in April 1986. The Board notes that the Navy is very reluctant to discharge an individual with more than 19 years of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00505-07
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 13 July 1995 at age 17 and served without disciplinary incident until 9...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11360-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _application on 9 August 2011. 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 29 October 1991 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11143-09
However, the Board concluded that your reenlistment code should not be changed, your pay grade of E-4 should not be reinstated, nor should your security clearance revocation documentation be removed because of your substandard performance and misconduct. The Board concluded that you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service, because Sailors who are separated for misconduct normally receive an other than honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08054-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, the advisory opinion furnished by the Headquarters Marine Corps, 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 Marine Corps on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08261-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2011. 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 | CY2013 | NR2933-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.