Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12280-09
Original file (12280-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

SIN

Docket No: 12280-09
27 January 2010

 

_ 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 26 January 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 and began a period of active duty on

24 January 2006 at age 19. During the period from 24 January
2006 to 7 June 2007, you received three nonjudicial punishments
(NJP’s} for disobedience, being incapacitated for the proper
performance of your duties, and unauthorized absence.
Additionally, you were counseled and warned, after your first
NIP, that further misconduct could resuit in administrative
discharge action. On 8 June’ 2007, you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct dve to a
pattern of misconduct. You waived your rights to consult
counsel, submit a statement or have your case reviewed by higher
authority. Your commanding officer directed that you be
discharged under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct.
On 26 June 2007 you were so discharged. At that time, you were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and record

_of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors

were not sufficient to warrant any change in your discharge given
your record of three NUP’s, two of which occurred after you were
counseled and warned concerning the consequences of further

misconduct. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to

receive a general discharge since a discharge undér other than
honorable conditions is often directed when an individual is
discharged for misconduct. Finally, with regard to your
reenlistment code, an RE-4 must be assigned to all Sailors
discharged due to 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,

\ pa Buk

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06714-07

    Original file (06714-07.rtf) 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.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 5 March 2002 at age 23. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is...

  • 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 | 02548-09

    Original file (02548-09.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. The Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your reenlistment code. 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 | 11143-09

    Original file (11143-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Board concluded that your reenlistment code should not be changed, your pay grade of E-4 should not be reinstated, nor should your security clearance revocation documentation be removed because of your substandard performance and misconduct. The Board concluded that you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service, because Sailors who are separated for misconduct normally receive an other than honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00546-10

    Original file (00546-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 September 2010. However, the SARP at Corpus Christi Hospital and your command Drug and Alcohol Program Assistant (DAPA) Ggtermined that you were an alcohol rehabilitation failure and it was recommended that you be separated for not complying with the Peonmended treatment. On 27 February 2008, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02979-09

    Original file (02979-09.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. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10141-09

    Original file (10141-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. On 12 February 2007, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing under honorable conditions due to misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06798-06

    Original file (06798-06.rtf) 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.After careful an conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Boar found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 2 June 1986 y u enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 12 January 1989 you received NJP for three...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04816-09

    Original file (04816-09.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 April 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06038-10

    Original file (06038-10.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 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...