DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
_ 701 $. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BIG a .
Docket No: 6580-13
S March 2014
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 5 March 2014. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material ~
error or injustice. .
You enlisted in the’ Navy and eritered'a period ‘of active duty on. _
27 February 1995. You accepted nonjudicial punishment (NIP) on
two occasions for failure to obey a lawful order (four.
instances), conspiracy (three instances), making a false
official statement, and breaking restriction. You were found
guilty” at each NUP and did not appeal. Your final performance
evaluation did not recommend-you for retention. You completed
your required active duty on 3 February 1999 in pay grade E-2,
were honorably transferred to the Navy Reserve, and assigned an
RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code.
At the completion of an initial period of active duty, a Sailor
must be serving in pay grade E-3 and be recommended for
promotion to be eligible for reenlistment. ,
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and ©
current desire to remove the. NJP's from your record. The Board
found that you were given the opportunity to consult. with
counsel prior to your NJP’s, and that you signed the Unit
Punishment Book acknowledging this. The Board did not consider
the reduction in pay grade to be an overly harsh punishment.
The Board concluded that you have failed to prove an error or
injustice in the NJP‘s remaining in your official military.
personnel file. Finally, the Board found that your RE-4 reentry
code was correctly assigned in light of your misconduct, non-
recommendation for retention, and failure to meet professional
growth criteria. In view of the above, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon, request. — 7 .
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,
| ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
Copy to: | .
Richard L. Morris, Esq.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3108 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2014. It was also noted on that evaluation that you had received three NJP’s and were not recommended for retention. 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 | CY2013 | NR3348 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. On 15 October 2008, you were discharged in pay grade E-2 with a general characterization of service due to misconduct, and assigned an RE-4 reentry 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 | CY2013 | NR3434-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2014. 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, togéther with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9033 13_Redacted
You were then advised that your command was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to misconduct. You waived your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2014 | NR021 14
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, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. An RE-4 reentry code is required when a Marine is discharged due to misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3446-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR4292 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2014. The Board found that your commanding officer's decision to impose the foregoing NJP, and the punishment imposed, was appropriate, and that it was administratively and procedurally correct. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5029 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 2014. 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 | CY2014 | NR0537 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July -2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded those factors insufficient to warrant a change in the reentry code based on non-recommendation for retention in pay grade E-3. 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 | CY2013 | NR9033 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your _ application on 1 October 2014. You waived your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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.