DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS |
7015S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 8265-13
4 September 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 3 September 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 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
3 March 2005. The Board found that on 8 and 13 August 2012, you
were arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol.
Subsequently, on 5 December 2012, administrative separation
action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of
a serious offense. You elected to consult counsel and have your
case heard before an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 2
May 2013, the ADB recommended separation with a general discharge
by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.
On 11 June 2013, your commanding officer concurred with the ADB‘s
findings and forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged,
On 20 June 2013, the separation authority directed a general -
discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense. On 26 June 2013 you were so discharged. At that time,
you were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry
code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of
service, desire to change your reentry code, and contention that
your were discharged because of your sexual orientation.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors and contention
were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given
your arrests for DUI and pending civil court proceedings.
Finally, an RE-4 reentry code must be assigned to all Sailors
discharged due to misconduct. Concerning your contention, there
“is no evidence in the record to support it, and you submitted no
“such evidence. This Board is not an investigative body nor does
it have the resources to investigate unsubstantiated allegations
regarding individuals and occurrences. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or
change the reason for separation because you did not request such
action, and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of
applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). You may
apply to NDRB by submitting the attached DD Form 293.
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 J. O’ NEILL
Executive Director
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Sep 21 09_17_36 CDT 2000
Further, other individuals stated that you did not notify the command until the third duty day after the arrest. You contend that the arrest was reported on the first day back to work; you were directed not to have any contact with anyone on board the submarine, and therefore could not obtain any witnesses; the executive officer threatened further adverse action if you appealed the NJP; and you were told that you would receive additional alcohol rehabilitation prior to discharge. ...
USMC | DRB | 2015_Marine | MD1401495
20130221: Commanding General, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing forwarded Report of Misconduct to the Commandant of the Marine Corps recommending the Applicant’s administrative separation as a probationary officer via notification procedures. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00580-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 23 February 1988 for three years. The Board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code since you were treated no differently than others discharged under similar circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00801-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 1999. Your record reflects that prior to your reenlistment you had four convictions for driving under the influence (DUI) and had completed in-patient (level 111) alcohol rehabilitation treatment in April 1986. The Board notes that the Navy is very reluctant to discharge an individual with more than 19 years of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4351 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a ‘civil conviction and that you were no longer qualified for submarine service... The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since Sailors who are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4628 14
RECORDS 701 5. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, ang 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 material error or injustice.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130013154
The applicant requests to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable, and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. He was discharged as a SPC/E-4. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an affidavit in support of warrantless arrest, dated 30 September 2012; county court document indicates, on 21 March 2013, a motion to dismiss a case against the applicant was granted because no officer was available...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2510-13
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2014. You were "80 discharged .On 29 October 1992. , Ce The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially’ mitigating factors, such as your record of service, post service accomplishments, character letters, and desire to upgrade your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01067 12
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. Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00459 12
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. You requested to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). The Board did not consider whether your discharge should be upgraded due to the fact that since it is less than 15 years old, you must first apply to the Navy Discharge Review Board (NDRB).