DEPARTMENT OF THE NPVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVYANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 5403-03
15 August 2003
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 13 August 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 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 26 December
1995. The record reflects that on 3 June 1996 you submitted a
written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to
avoid trial by court-martial for an unauthorized absence of 60
days. Your record also shows that prior to submitting this
request you conferred with a qualified military lawyer at which
time you were advised of your rights and warned of the probable
adverse consequences of accepting such a discharge. The Board
found that your request was grantesd and, as a result of this
action, you were spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction
and the potential penalties of a punitive discharge and
confinement at pard labor. You received an other than honorable
discharge on 7 June 1996. At that time, you were assigned an
RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board noted that applicable regulations require the
assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is
discharged in lieu of court-martial. Since you have been treated
no differently than others in your situation, the Board could not
find an error or injustice in the assignment of your reenlistment
code. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
The Board did not consider whether your characterization of
service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did
not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your
administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review
Board (NDRB). You may apply to NDRB by submitting the attached
DD Form 293.
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,
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 04580-03
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10406-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your applicati.on on 7 January 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. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10413-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2003. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4. The Board did not consider whether the characterization of service or reason for your separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge and Review Board (NDRB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02682-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2002. 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. 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 | CY2006 | 08569-06
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08185-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2005. Although the request for discharge is not in your record, it appears that you subsequently requested an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing period of absence. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09675-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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. 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 | CY2001 | 05602-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2001. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of together with all material submitted in support your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09325-02
The record appears to indicate that you were confined during the period of 6 to 30 December 1999. Therefore it appears that although you were not an unauthorized absentee during this period, time lost since you were serving the confinement adjudged at the The names SCM. 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 | CY2006 | 08766-06
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 Reserve on 21 November 1996 and reported to active...