Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13127-09
Original file (13127-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TAL
Docket No: 13127-09
3 September 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 1 September 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.

BEter 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 10
August 1999 at age 18. You received nonjudicial punishment (NIP)
on five occasions for two instances of willfully disobeying a
lawful order, two instances of making false official statements,
larceny of another’s personal property, jumping from a vessel
into the water and two instances of unauthorized absence (UA)
from your unit. You were counseled regarding your misconduct and
warned that further offenses could result in administrative
separation. Based on the snformation currently contain in your
record it appears that you were subsequently processed for
administrative separation. In connection with this processing,
you would have acknowledged the separation action and the
discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for
separation. The record clearly shows that on 19 May 2005, you
were discharged with a general discharge due to misconduct. 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
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your
reenlistment code given the seriousness of your misconduct that
resulted in five NUPs. An RE-4 reenlistment code must be
assigned to all Sailors discharged due to misconduct. Finally,
the Board also believed that you were fortunate to receive a
general discharge since a separation under other than honorable
conditions is often directed when a Sailor is separated for
misconduct. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.

 

The Board also noted that you are entitled to submit the attached
Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the
Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 293) to the Naval
Council of Personnel Review Boards, Attention: Naval Discharge
Review Board (NDRB), 720 Kennon Street SE, Room 309, Washington
Navy Yard, Washington, District Columbia 20375-5023, for
consideration of an upgrade of your discharge and a change a6
your narrative reason for discharge.

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 injustuce..

Sincerely,

D Dod

Executive Di

 
  

 

 

Enclosure

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11510-10

    Original file (11510-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval , Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of 2 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00166-11

    Original file (00166-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. The Board also noted that you are entitled to submit the attached Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 293} to the Naval Council of Personnel Review Boards, Attention: Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB)}, 720 Kennon Street, SE, Room 309, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, DC...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02063-11

    Original file (02063-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02505-09

    Original file (02505-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due to misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02976-09

    Original file (02976-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application-on 5 January 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materiai submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequentiy, 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 | 13131-09

    Original file (13131-09.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 September 2010. After your first NUP, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of 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 | 09502-09

    Original file (09502-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08261-10

    Original file (08261-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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 | CY2009 | 12133-09

    Original file (12133-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 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 | 11846-09

    Original file (11846-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 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, You enlisted in the Navy Reserve and began a period of active duty on 21 November 1974. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...