DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No:
16 August 2001
6485-00
Dear
This is in reference to your
naval record pursuant to the
States Code section 1552.
application for correction of your
provisions of Title 10 of the United
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 14 August 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
Board.
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
Your allegations of error and
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.
On 26
You reenlisted in the Navy for six years on 8 May 1989.
September 1990 you were counseled and warned concerning a pattern
About eleven months later, on 12
of failure to pay just debts.
August 1991, you were notified of separation processing by reason
of misconduct due to an established pattern of failure to pay
An administrative discharge board met on 16 October
just debts.
1991, found that you had committed misconduct and recommended an
honorable discharge.
approved the recommendation of your commanding officer that you
be discharged for misconduct with an honorable discharge.
On 27 February 1992 the discharge authority
The separation performance evaluation states that you did not
possess the rating knowledge commensurate with your rate.
Concerning your financial problems, the evaluation states, in
part, as follows:
(His) financial problems have been recurring as stated
on his evaluations throughout his Naval career.
become an administrative burden . . . . .
He has
You were honorably discharged by reason of misconduct on 13 March
At that time you were not recommended for reenlistment and
The record shows that
1992.
were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
you had completed 13 years,
service.
10 months and 12 days of active
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
In
when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct.
addition, the evaluation comments concerning your poor
performance of duty would support the assignment of an
reenlistment code.
than others discharged for misconduct or poor performance of
duty, the Board could not find an error or injustice in the
assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code.
Since you have been treated no differently
RE-4
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 09655-05
After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 15 October 1992 you received an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. 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 | CY2007 | 01655-07
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 Navy on 2 December 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. You...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02266-01
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 May 2001. Since you have been treated no differently than others discharged for that reason, the Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of the RE-4 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00692-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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 together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, Your allegations of error and After careful and conscientious consideration of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07822-00
you exercised poor judgment and immaturity in the handling of your financial affairs, been involved in two incidents of The reporting senior noted that during this period Your performance as an EW2 However, the domestic violence, and failed your semi-annual physical readiness test. discharged on 24 March 2000 with an You were not recommended for retention and were honorably RX-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09510-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 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. On 30 March 1992 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, drug abuse,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04179-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2012. 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...
AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00085
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-01-00085 I GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. For writing these bad checks, the respondent received nonjudicial punishment under Letter of Reprimand for financial irresponsibility, and restriction to Hill AFB for 30 days. We recommend that you order the respondent's separation from the A i r Force with a general discharge without P & R under AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-47d, for the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04435-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to one in favor of an administrative honorable discharge due to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR3597 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. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed separation under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct, and on 2 March 1993, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...