DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TOR ;
Docket No: 9530-08
19 August 2009
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 18 August 2009. The names and votes of the
‘members of the panel will be Furnished upon request. 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 ali
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 21 October 2002 at age 18 and served
for five years and seven months without disciplinary incident.
But on 29 May 2008 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for
dereliction of duty, making a false official statement, and
communicating a threat. The punishment imposed was reduction in
paygrade, restriction for 45 days, and a $2,527.30 forfeiture of
pay. The paygrade reduction was suspended for six months.
However, this suspended punishment was vacated due to your
continued misconduct, and on 23 July 2008, you received your
second NOP for making a false official statement.
On 23 July 2008 you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. After consulting with legal. counsel, you waived
your right to submit a statement in yebuttal to the discharge.
oan ea ea
On 25 July 2008 your commanding officer recommended discharge by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense and a
pattern of misconduct as evidenced by two NUPs, repeated
violations, unsuitability, actions clearly undermining good order
and discipline, and an unwillingness to conform to rules and
regulations. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you
a general discharge by reason of misconduct. On 8 August 2008
you signed an administrative remarks entry in which you
acknowledged that you were not recommended for reenlistment due
to your misconduct. On 22 August 2008, while serving in paygrade
E-3, you were so discharged and were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application
with attachments, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors, such as your youth, explanation regarding the
circumstances surrounding your NUPs and discharge. It also
considered your desire to change the characterization of your
discharge, narrative reason for separation, and reenlistment
code, and to be restored to paygrade E-4. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge, restoration in paygrade, or
a change in your narrative reason for separation or reenlistment
code because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct
which resulted in two NJPs and multiple counselling sessions for
your repetitive misconduct. Further, you were given an
opportunity to defend yourself, but waived your procedural right
to submit a statement of rebuttal to the discharge and your
nonrecommendation for reenlistment. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.
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,
W. DEAN PFE FRER
Executive Di tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09184-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. It also considered your assertion that your misconduct, discharge, and reenlistment code were the result of your abuse of alcohol.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07698-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 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 | 08129-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 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. On 2 March 1982 you received NJP for communicating a threat and were awarded a suspended forfeiture of pay.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11198-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. On 26 February 1992 an ADB recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06392-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 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 | CY2010 | 02641-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. 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 | 08110-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 October 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because of your disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08780-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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 | CY2009 | 12857-09
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. On 9 November 1994, you received your second NUP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days and a $388 forfeiture of pay, which was suspended for six months. In this regard, the Board determined that a personal...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09232-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 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. Concerning your contention of inadequate counsel, the Board Cannot consider such a contention as it pertains to a court- martial, and must restrict...