DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 10212-02
8 September 2003
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 3 September 2003.
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 19 June 1989 after nearly four
years of prior honorable service.
disciplinary incident until 10 August 1990, when you received
nonjudicial punishment
absence
WA), absence from your appointed place of duty, and
missing the movement of your ship.
reduction to
You were in a UA status from 27 to 30 January 1992, however, the
record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any,
for this misconduct.
On 6 March 1992, after undergoing a psychiatric evaluation, you
were diagnosed as alcohol dependent even though you had
participated in a Level III in-patient rehabilitation program in
February 1990.
You continued to serve without
(NJP) for a 26 day period of unauthorized
You were also diagnosed with drug abuse and a
The punishment imposed was
paygrade E-4.
The punishment imposed was
The
personality disorder with borderline and dependent traits.
psychiatric evaluation report further stated, in part, that you
had suicidal ideation and were unable to control your alcohol
You were then recommended you for an administrative
intake.
separation.
On 18 March 1992 you received NJP for a 17 day period of UA and
missing the movement of your ship.
restriction and extra duty for 21 days and a reduction to
paygrade E-4.
Subsequently, on 22 April 1992, you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to
At that time you waived your
commission of a serious offense.
right to consult with legal counsel and to present your case to
an administrative discharge board.
commanding officer recommended separation by reason of misconduct
due to commission of a serious offense.
discharge authority then directed a general discharge by reason
of misconduct, and on 15 June 1992 you were so discharged. At
that time you were 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 prior honorable service and your contention that your
punishment for being UA was excessive.
your contention no one explained the assignment of the RE-4
reenlistment code.
factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your discharge or a change in the
reenlistment code because of the serious nature of your
misconduct.
an individual discharged for misconduct. 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
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.
Further, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required wher
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
On 29 April 1992 your
On 4 June 1992 the
It further considered
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09544-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 7 August 1989 at age 18. On 6 March 1992 you were so discharged and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12050 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11876-08
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 18 July 1990, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. The Board found that you waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better characterization of service:.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01539 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01774-09
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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, desire to change your reenlistment code, and removal of documentation referring to periods of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00066-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 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 5 February 1993, the ADB voted to administratively separate you for misconduct with a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07805-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 26 June 1990 at age 21 and began a two year period of active...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00477 12
On 4 May 1990, you were UA for three days, with no disciplinary action taken. On 5 September and 1 October 1990, you were UA one day each, and no disciplinary action was taken against you. On 8 July 1991, you were UA again for one day and no disciplinary action was taken.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06700-01
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. On 25 February 1993 you received your fourth NJP for absence from your appointed place of duty and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01158-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 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. The record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this misconduct.