DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 7087-08
27 March 2009
This ig in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code gection 1552.
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 19 February 2009. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 1 July 1988. On
5 March 2004 you were convicted by civil authorities of spousal
assault, assault with deadly weapon, use of a deadly weapon,
making a criminal threat, tampering with electric, telephone, and
cable, and attempting to dissuade a witness. The court sentenced
you to probation for five years and a fine of $239 plus penalty
assessment. On 24 January 2006 you received nonjudicial
punishment for making a false statement to a senior chief that
you did not alter and forge two leave and earnings statements for
submission to the court presiding over your divorce proceedings.
On 20 April 2006 an administrative discharge review board (ADB)
recommended that you be separated with a discharge under other
than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the
commission of a serious offense, and recommended that the
execution of the discharge be suspended for six months. On 18
May 2006 your commanding officer disagreed with the suspension
recommendation and forwarded the ADB decision via the Navy
Personnel Command to the Secretary of the Navy, who directed that
the discharge be executed. You were discharged under other than
honorable conditions and assigned a reentry code of RE-4 on 30
Sune 2006. ‘The Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request
for recharacterization of your service on 4 April 2008.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully considered
your contentions to the effect that your discharge is wholly
attributable to your divorce and the vindictive acts of your
former spouse, that your discharge in unfair given your excellent
record of service over the course of a lengthy career, and that
you would remained on active duty until you qualified for
transfer to the Fleet Reserve but for the Secretary of the Navy’s
decision to overrule the ADB. The Board concluded that you
committed significant acts of misconduct during your enlistment
which far outweighed the positive aspects of your service, and
warranted a discharge under other than honorable conditions. As
you were discharged by reason of misconduct, the assignment of a
reentry code of RE-4 was required. Accordingly, and as you have
not demonstrated that it would be in the interest of justice for
the Board to upgrade your discharge, 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,
Ve ted
W. DEAN DF
Executive Dil r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR520 14
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. 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 | CY2012 | 02341 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2013. 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 | CY2006 | 02065-06
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 on 20 October 1988 at age 21 and served for eight months without...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03038-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 7itting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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 5 December 1994 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reaton of misconduct due to commission of a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04071-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2012. 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. Finally, members of the armed services who are convicted by civil authorities may be discharged for misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01756-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 2010. You were notified that your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06827-06
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.On 28 October 1981 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18. On that same date, you were separated...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00907-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2012. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when a Sailor is separated at the expiration of his term of active obligated service and is not recommended for retention. 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.
NAVY | DRB | 2008_Navy | ND0800609
The Administrative board then voted 2-1 that the misconduct warranted separation with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. In accordance with regulation, when separation processing is warranted for more than one reason the service member shall be processed for all valid causes. Violations of UCMJ Articles 107 and 123 constitute the “commission of a serious offense”, the discharge basis in this case.
USMC | DRB | 2012_Marine | MD1201589
Relief denied.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 remain .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 are...