DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BOARD FOR
JRE
Docket No. 00707-08
25 November 2008
nee to your applic
nt to the provisi
section 1552.
This is in refere
naval record pursua
United States Code,
llegations of error and
applicatio mber 2008. Your 4
,ewed in accordance with administrative
injus
procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
regulations and
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
her with all material submitted in
ion of the entire
submitted was
after caref
f probable material
rd, the Board foun
reco
o estab
snsufficient t
injustice.
error or
erve on 18
sted in the Navy Res
hiatric
nda that you reenli
You underwent PSsYS
for a term of six years.
ecember 2004 and were
The Board fou
October 2002
evaluation on 8 D
major depressive
psychotic fea
time. In a le
;dered fit
ary 2005, a civilian
ized for
psychiatrist indicate
psychiatric treatment on 12 February 2005 following an
on 29 August 2005 you were convicted by special
of being
jeas of guilty, =
valtercation”.
perior chief petty ©
court-martial,
disrespect ful in
pursuant to your Pp C
fficer, and
language to a 8U
assaulting a chief petty officer by striking at him with a
retractable baton device. Both offenses occurred on 12 February
2005. The court sentenced to reduction to pay grade E-5,
confinement for ninety days, and forfeiture $500.00 pay per
month for three months.
On 27 September 2005, after being advised by your rights in
connection with your proposed discharged by reason of
misconduct/commission of a serious offense, you declined to
consult with counsel, and waived your rights to appear before an
administrative discharge board (ADB), submit statements to an
ADB or the discharge authority in lieu of an ADB, and
representation before an ADB by qualified military counsel or
civilian counsel at your own expense. The recommendation for
discharge was approved by the separation authority, who directed
that you be discharged by reason of misconduct/commission of a
serious offense, with a discharge under other than honorable
conditions. You were so discharged on 13 November 2005.
The Board concluded that the available evidence is insufficient
to demonstrate that you were unfit for duty by reason of
physical disability at the time of your discharge. It noted that
you would not have been entitled to disability separation or
retirement even if you had been unfit for duty at that time,
because your discharge by reason of misconduct would have taken
precedence over and precluded disability processing.
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 discharge should be
upgraded to general or honorable since you have not exhausted an
available 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05457-07
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.On 13 April 2000, you enlisted in the Navy at age 17 with parental consent. On 29 September 2002, one...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08967-05
In his endorsement on your appeal CSG2 analyzed the evidence concerning the charge of indecent assault and stated that he believed a preponderance of the evidence supported his finding of guilty. He conceded that the evaluation at issue was erroneously prepared and indicated that action would be taken to file a corrected evaluation but strongly recommended that your application for advancement to chief petty officer be denied. The opinion concluded by stating that given the no misconduct...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0801629
After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Record Entries, Discharge Process and evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Board found ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant Complaint Procedures : If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02245-11
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. The Board did-not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06218-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulation 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 injusticeThe Board found that YOU reenlisted in the Navy on 15 November 2002 after more than three years of...
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800595
Applicant’s Request: Characterization change to: Narrative Reason change to: Summary of Service Prior Service: Inactive: USNR (DEP)NONEActive: Period of Service Under Review: Date of Enlistment: 20030417Period of enlistment: YearsExtensionDate of Discharge:20070425Length of Service: Active: Yrs Mths21 Dys Inactive: Yrs Mths17Education Level: Age at Enlistment:AFQT: 63Highest Rank/Rate:AO3Evaluation marks:Performance: NFIRBehavior:NFIROTA: NFIRAwards and Decorations (per DD 214):N&MCPeriods...
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 | CY2012 | 01067 12
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 case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. 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...
NAVY | DRB | 2012_Navy | ND1201413
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07893-07
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.On 22 September 1992, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. On 14 December 1993, your commanding...