Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11001-09
Original file (11001-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

Docket No: 11001-09
23 duly 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 21 July 2010. 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 2 April 2002, at the age of 18. On
25 February 2004, you received nonjudicial punishment (NOP) for
writing insuffient fund checks to the Army and Air Force Exchange
Services (AAEFS) totaling $3,034. On 28 June 2004, you were
counseled concerning your failure to pay outstanding debts ina
timely manner. On 4 January 2005, you were counseled for
violating a liberty policy. You were notified that you were
being administratively separated with a general discharge for
misconduct (minor disciplinary anfractions) and would receive a
reenlistment code of RE-4 upon your separation. You were 50

discharged on 19 January 2007.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. However, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant any change in your character of service, or
reenlistment code given your record of one NJP. The Board also

noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge
since a separation under other than honorable conditions is often
directed when an individual is found to have committed
misconduct. 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,

pers.

W. DEAN PFENF
Executive Diyektor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03764-09

    Original file (03764-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2010. 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 6 January 2004, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04508-09

    Original file (04508-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction cf Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2010. 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 | 02996-09

    Original file (02996-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2010. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02306-09

    Original file (02306-09.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. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction, and on 7 March 2006, you were so discharged and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10024-09

    Original file (10024-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2010. 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 | 02605-09

    Original file (02605-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2010. The Board noted that applicable regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are separated due to misconduct of serious offenses. 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 | CY2009 | 09392-09

    Original file (09392-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    “A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2009 | 08975-09

    Original file (08975-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 02531-10

    Original file (02531-10.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 November 2010. However, the Board concluded that your reentry code should not be upgraded due to your 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 | CY2009 | 02393-09

    Original file (02393-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. 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...