DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No:
506-05
5 October
2005
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 4
October 2005. 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 enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 13 November 1990 at age 19 and
began a period of active duty on 27 November 1990. You served
without disciplinary incident until 4 March 1991, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order,
unlawful entry, and making a false official statement. On 10 October
and again on 7 November 1991 you received NJP for two periods of
authorized absence (UA) totalling 27 days, absence from your
appointed place of duty, wrongful use of a telephone calling card
valued at $140.70, two specifications of disrespect, and breaking
restriction.
On 25 January 1992 you received NJP for disrespect, failure to obey
a lawful order, assault, and using provoking speech. A year later,
on 28 January 1993, you received your fifth NJP for disobedience,
disrespect, and a 12 day period of UA. The punishment imposed was a
$192 forfeiture of pay and reduction to paygrade E-2.
On 7 March 1993, while serving in paygrade E-2, you were honorably released
from active duty and transferred to the Naval Reserve. At that time you
were not recommended for reenlistment and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code. On 12 November 1998, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were
honorably discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully
weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and claim
that you would like your reenlistment code upgraded so that you may enlist
in the Naval Reserve in Montgomery, AL. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment
code because of your serious misconduct, which resulted in five NJPs and
repeated periods of UA, and since you were not recommended for
reenlistment. 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,
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06507-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2009. On 28 March 1991 you received your fourth NJP for three periods of failure to,go to your appointed place of duty and were awarded a $800 forfeiture of pay, restriction for 30 days, and reduction to paygrade E-2. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03443-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09396-07 (2)
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2008. However, this request was denied, the BCD was approved at all levels of review, and on 10 August 1991 you were so discharged. It also considered your request for administrative corrections to your Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty (DD Form 214).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06853-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The punishment imposed was a $1,260 forfeiture of pay, The Board found you reenlisted in the Navy on 25 April 1990 after Your record reflects that six years of prior honorable service. case, the Board concluded your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01610-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2010. After waiving your procedural rights, the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense, and on 18 April 1990, you were so discharged. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
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 | CY2010 | 05655-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and belief that your offenses do not warrant a BCD. 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 | CY2013 | NR7406 13
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. Nevertheless, based on the information currently contained in your record, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your NJP, and conviction by SPCM of a period of UA that lasted over 14 months, ending with your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09871-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | CY2007 | 09112-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as the passage of...