Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4092 14
Original file (NR4092 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

EGA
Docket No: 4092-14
2 April 2015

Dear (ey

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 20 March 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.

In regard to your request for a personal appearance, be advised
that Board regulations state personal appearances before the
Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board
determines that such an appearance will serve some useful
purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a personal
appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on
the evidence of the record.

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 Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 30 December 2002. You served without disciplinary
incident until 28 January 2004, when you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for two specifications of failure to obey
orders. On 19 August 2004, you received NJP for failure to obey
orders, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct. On

i4 May 2005, you received a third NJP for failure to obey orders
and destruction of government property. As a result, you were
recommended for an administrative separation by reason of
misconduct. On 19 August 2005, you were discharged with an
other than honorable characterization of service and assigned an
RE-4 reentry code,

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,

. carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
‘your desire to upgrade your character of service and

reenlistment code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case,
given your misconduct and you were not recommended for |
reenlistment. Finally, Marines discharged by reason of
misconduct would normally be assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code,
which is a bar to reenlistment. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.

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 within one year from the date of the Board’s decision.
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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5859 14

    Original file (NR5859 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 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 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3611 14

    Original file (NR3611 14.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 May 2015. At that time, you were assigned an RE-3C 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 | CY2014 | NR6276 14

    Original file (NR6276 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07959-10

    Original file (07959-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2010. On 15 August 2005, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial. As a result of this action on 2 November 2005 you were discharged under OTH conditions.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2134 14

    Original file (NR2134 14.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. Shortly thereafter, on 30 March 2009, you were counselled and advised that because of your NJP you would be assigned an RE-3C 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06323-07

    Original file (06323-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The reporting senior stated, in part, as follows: (Member) requires direct supervision to get satisfactory results.... he takes no ownership of any actions and constantly makes excuses for his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5656 14

    Original file (NR5656 14.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 2015. Finally, with regard to your assertions, the Board noted that your NUP was appropriately documented in your official military personnel file in accordance with applicable regulations and there is no error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1603 14

    Original file (NR1603 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting -in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2015. 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. 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 | CY2008 | 08000-08

    Original file (08000-08.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. On 22 November 2005 an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of convenience of the government due to alcohol rehabilitation failure. On 2 February 2006 you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03684-07

    Original file (03684-07.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. On 27 September 2005 you received your fourth NUP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty. Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is separated by reason of misconduct.