DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 920-08
10 December 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 9 December 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 August 1999 at age 17 and served
without disciplinary incident until 25 July 2000, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for larceny of a wallet and
$60. The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty for
45 days, reduction in paygrade, and a $1,006 forfeiture of pay.
On 9 July 2003 you were convicted by civil authorities of
resisting arrest and being drunk in public. You were sentenced
to a $450 fine and confinement for 30 days. A portion of the
confinement was suspended.
Your record contains a separation performance evaluation which
states, in part, that you were not recommended for retention/
advancement/reenlistment because of your inability to adapt,
flaunting authority, antisocial behavior, substandard performance
in a team environment, and conviction by civil authorities.
On 30 September 2003, while serving in paygrade E-3 and at the
expiration of your enlistment, you were honorably 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 so that
you may reenlist. It also considered your desire to use military
benefits for a college education. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your reenlistment code because of your disciplinary record
which resulted in NUP, conviction by civil authorities, and your
substandard performance which resulted in a nonrecommendation for
retention or reenlistment. 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,
lDaaday
W. DEAN PFEL
Executive Di or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03755-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 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 Naval Reserve and began a period of active duty on 27 January 1983. However, 364...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06323-07
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07418-05
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 Naval Reserve and began a period of active duty on 19 January 2000, and served...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03702-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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 | CY2002 | 03374-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable service and post service conduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06382-07
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. December 1984 to 3 May 1985, which was submitted on the occasion of your separation, states that you were not recommended for advancement or retention due to an increase in your weight physical qualifications. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09424-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2009. 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. In this regard, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07207-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in, executive session, considered your application on 13 May 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
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 | CY2007 | 09104-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2008. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of the adverse discharge evaluation which recommended that you not be allowed to reenlist. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...