DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
761 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-24390
TAL
Docket No: 1603-14
12 March 2015
Dear Sy
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. °
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits.- A three-.
member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting
-in executive session, considered your application on 25 February
2015. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be
furnished upon request. 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
30 May 2002. You served for two years and one month without
disciplinary incident, but during the period of 21 July to 17
September 2004, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on two
eccasions. Your offenses were insubordinate: conduct, failure to
obey a lawful order, using provoking speech and gestures, carrying
a concealed weapon and breaking restriction.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation
by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense at
which time you waived your procedural right to consult with legal
counsel. Your commanding officer recommended a general discharge by
reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. The
discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed a
general characterization of service by reason of misconduct.
‘On 15 October 2004, you were so discharged and at that time you
were assigned an RE-4 reentry code, which means that you are
neither recommended nor eligible for reenlistment.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your
desire to upgrade your reentry code. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in
your case because of the seriousness of your repeated misconduct.
Finally, an RE-4 reentry code must be assigned to all Sailors
discharged due to misconduct. Accordingly, your application has
been denied.
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 20375-5023, for consideration of an upgrade of your
discharge and a change in 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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision. New
evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior
to making its decision in your case. 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.
Singepely.
ROBERT J.O* NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5982 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2015. 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. With regard to your assertions, the Board considered whether being threatened was a causative factor in the misconduct that resulted in your discharge.
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 | CY2009 | 03364-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2010. , On 17 July 2000 your commanding officer recommended that you be separated from the Navy with a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. 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 | NR6501 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2015. 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 IjUustice. 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 | CY2014 | NR11768 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 Aprii 2015. 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 | NR4741 14
A - three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on. 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 error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1811 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2015. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and desire to upgrade your discharge. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07061-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2009. 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 concluded, however, that as the assignment of a reentry code of RE-4 is required when an individual is discharged by reason of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6913 14_Redacted
A three- member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 2015. Concerning your assertion that you were discharged due to your dismissed domestic battery charge in civilian court, there is no indication in the record that this was the case; you were discharged for willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer’s military protective order to stay away from your spouse. In your case, the Board determined...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04211-06
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.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 13 March 2003. After review by the discharge...