DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG
Docket No: 7627-08
10 October 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 30 September 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 29 October 2001. You then
served in a satisfactory manner for several years. Apparently
after a period of annual training, it was discovered that you had
failed to repay $452.18 of unauthorized charges to your
government travel card. On 22 January 2005 you signed an
agreement to repay the debt. On 27 February 2005, you received
nonjudicial punishment for failure to pay your debt and the
documentation stated that you had failed to comply with your
agreement to pay. Subsequently, you made two payments totaling
$290. There is no further information concerning payments in
your record. On 24 March 2005 you were notified of separation
processing by certified mail. There is no evidence in the record
that you replied to the notification. After review, the
discharge authority directed a general discharge by reason of
misconduct and you were so discharged on 23 September 2005. At
that time, you were not recommended for reenlistment and were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your period of good
service and the statement you submitted which purports to show
that your indebtedness at issue was paid in full in April 2007.
The Board did not consider upgrading your discharge or changing
the reason for your discharged because you are required to have
these issues considered by the Naval Discharge Review Board prior
to consideration by this Board. However, it is noted that there
is no evidence that you contested the discharge processing or
explained the indebtedness status to the discharge authority.
Concerning the RE-4 reenlistment code, regulations require the
assignment of such a code with an individual is discharged by
reason of misconduct. Since you have been treated no differently
than others discharged for that reason, the Board could not find
an error or injustice in the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment
code.
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,
len
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10250-02
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. Accordingly, on 13 November 2001, the discharge authority disapproved your request for retention in a noncombatant status but directed an honorable discharge by reason of "conscientious objectorn. It is clear from the regulations that the Navy Personnel Command was authorized to direct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007492
The applicant served the required ADSO incurred through receipt of this incentive. The reason for debt states: "Recoupment is required for the unearned portion of your enlistment or reenlistment bonus based on your separation code BNC. Records indicate the applicant received a $30,000.00 CSRB on 26 May 2012 which obligated him to a 60-month ADSO.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011931
The applicant states that he is currently on active duty in the Army. The applicant provides DA Form 5315-E (US Army Advanced Education Financial Assistance Record); Army Senior Reserve Officers Training Corps Scholarship Cadet Contract; Addendum to Part I Scholarship Contractual Agreement; Headquarters, United Stated Army Cadet Command (USACC) memorandum, dated 6 April 2005, subject: Disenrollment from the U.S. Army ROTC Program; University of Virginia memorandum subject: Disenrollment of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07773-10
On or about 13 March 2006, you appeared before a Performance Review Board {PRB} convened to inquire into your aptitude and performance. In the Board's view, your request to disenroll was a voluntary decision made of your own free will. Docket No._7773-10 were aware that you could continue in the NROTC program as well.?
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015613
In the memorandum from the Western Region, USACC, dated 11 January 2005, it was stated that the applicant's request for disenrollment was initiated to disenroll from the Army ROTC program in order to accept a Marine ROTC scholarship. The applicant's voluntary enlistment as a Naval ROTC cadet is not an authorized remedy for debt repayment under the terms of the U.S. Army ROTC contract. The applicant has failed to provide any evidence or argument that shows that there was an error or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03181-09
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. Regulations direct assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to members who are discharged 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014757
The applicant provides copies of her ROTC contract, ROTC disenrollment documents, ARNG enlisted discharge and commissioning order, her Oaths of Office, her acceptance of command of the 838th Military Police Company, her Federal recognition orders, two sets of orders to active duty for training, and four Leave and Earnings Statements (LESs). Had the applicant accepted entry onto active duty in lieu of repaying her ROTC debt, she would have been obligated to serve on active duty in an...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2009-056
On November 9, 1988, the OIC informed the applicant that the OIC was recommending that the applicant be discharged from the Coast Guard by reason of unsuitability due to financial irresponsibility. PSC further stated the following: A review of the applicant’s record supports that the Coast Guard complied with policies for processing individuals for financial irresponsibility. As indicated by the OIC’s letter to the Commandant requesting the applicant’s discharge, the applicant was...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01504
JOE G. LINEBERGER Director Air Force Review Boards Agency MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXX, BC-2005-01504 I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case and do not agree with the majority members that the applicant should not be relieved of the debt for the unearned portion of the initial enlistment bonus she received. In support of her request, the applicant submits a statement from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012617
The applicant states: * after the CAARNG's incentive bonus scandal was publicized and the misconduct of Master Sergeant (MSG) Txxx Jxxxx was revealed, the CAARNG established the Incentive Task Force (ITF) to investigate all bonuses paid by the State * during his 12 continuous years of service in the CAARNG, he received a total of three (3) incentive bonuses (an $8,000 enlistment bonus in 2001, a $15,000 reenlistment bonus in 2007, and a $10,000 officer accession bonus (OAB) in 2008) * during...