DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TUR
Docket No: 8767-98
30 June 1999
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 22 June 1999. 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.
The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 17 March 1986 at the
age of 22. Your record reflects that on 14 August 1986 you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for larceny. The
punishment imposed was restriction for 14 days and forfeitures
totalling $100. On 11 February 1987 you received NJP for absence
from your appointed place of duty, disobedience, and dereliction
in the performance of your duties. The punishment imposed was
restriction for 30 days, forfeitures totalling $200, and
reduction to paygrade E-2. The reduction was suspended for six
months. However, the foregoing suspension was vacated due to
your continued misconduct. On 6 March 1987 you received your
third NJP for three incidents of absence from your appointed
place of duty. The punishment imposed was restriction for 30
days, forfeitures totalling $738, and reduction to paygrade E-1.
Your record further reflects that on 9 March 1987 you were
notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. After consulting with
legal counsel you elected to present your case to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 27 March 1987 an ADB
recommended you be issued an other than honorable discharge by
reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. On 6 April
1987 your commanding officer also recommended you be issued an
other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a
pattern of misconduct. On 23 April 1987 the discharge authority
approved the foregoing recommendations and on 30 April 1987 you
were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity, post service conduct, and your
contention that you would like your discharge upgraded and your
reenlistment code changed so that you may reenlist. However, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge or a change in your
reenlistment code given your frequent misconduct which resulted
in three NUPs. Additionally, an RE-4 reenlistment code is
required when an individual is discharged by reason of
misconduct. Given all the circumstances in your case the Board
concluded your discharge and reenlistment code were proper as
issued and no change is warranted. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.
The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 08767-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 1999. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09
RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered 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 23 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07731-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2008. 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 | 10771-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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 | CY2006 | 01116-07
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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 12 May 1987 after four years of prior honorable service. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07680-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2002. 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. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09216-04
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 on 31 January 1984 at age 18. On 31 July 1986 you received NJP for assault...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03627-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 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 | CY2002 | 10956-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 October 2003. 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. However, on 18 December 1986, this suspended sentence was vacated due to your continued misconduct, specifically, a four day period of UA.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09184-04
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 on 3 October 1985 at age 18 and served without disciplinary incident until 11...