Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03173-09
Original file (03173-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TIR
Docket No: 3173-09
8 March 2010

 

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 2 March 2010. 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 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 30 September 1998 at age 24 and began
a period of active duty. You served without disciplinary
incident until 11 January 2001, when you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for failure to obey a lawful order.

On 1 August 2005 you received NUP for two periods of absence from
your appointed place of duty and were awarded restriction and
extra duty for 30 days, a $939 forfeiture of pay, and reduction
to paygrade E-4. A portion of the punishment was suspended for
six months. .

Your record contains an enlisted performance evaluation for the
period from 16 March to 9 December 2008 which states, in part,
that you were to be awarded NUP for drunken and reckless
operation of a vehicle, disciplinarily disenroiled from language
training, and not recommended for advancement or retention. On
10 December 2008 you received NJP for drunken and reckless
driving: The punishment imposed was restriction and extra duty
for 45 days, reduction to paygrade E-4, and a $1,067 forfeiture
of pay. Shortly thereafter, you received another evaluation
because of your separation due to high-year tenure. Again, you
were not recommended for advancement or retention.

On 28 December 2008, upon completion of your required active
service, you were honorably discharged. At that time you were
not recommended for reenlistment and were 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 enlist in another branch of service. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a
change in your reenlistment code because of the seriousness of
your misconduct which resulted in three NUPs. Further, the Board
concluded that your misconduct and nonrecommendation for
reenlistment were sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code, which is authorized by regulatory guidance.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

The Board suggested that you may wish to apply for a waiver of
your RE-4 reenlistment code with branches of the armed forces
other than the Navy.

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.

oo

Sincerely,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6276 14

    Original file (NR6276 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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 | 07230-12

    Original file (07230-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former member of the Marine Corps, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected by removing derogatory material regarding an offense of drunken or reckless driving which is reflected in his nonjudicial punishment (NJP) awarded on 15 December 2008. The Board, consisting of Ms. Guill, Mr. Marquez, and Mr. McBride, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 18 September 2012 and, pursuant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06323-07

    Original file (06323-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 05454 11

    Original file (05454 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 March 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. 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 | 06271-09

    Original file (06271-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 31 July 2004 you received NJP for assaulted consummated by battery and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to paygrade E-2, and a $1,412 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00171 12

    Original file (00171 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. An individual separated in paygrade E-3 who fails to meet the above criteria may receive an RE-3R reenlistment code if he/she is recommended for advancement to paygrade E-4 at the time of separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02092-08

    Original file (02092-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 record which resulted in two NUPs, failure of professional growth criteria, and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01169-09

    Original file (01169-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. For Sailors separated at the expiration of their first period of obligated service, Navy regulations state that professional — growth criteria must be met before they may reenlist. In this regard, you received a reenlistment code authorized by Navy regulations.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07996-07

    Original file (07996-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2008. On 30 March 2000 you again received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days, a reduction in paygrade, and a $1,000 forfeiture of pay. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08499-06

    Original file (08499-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 2007. 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...