DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 6484-07
13 May 2008
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 6 May 2008. 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
1 hWaWtaAa mantarianl oa
to establish the cxistence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 26 May 2000 at age 22 and served for
five months without disciplinary infraction. However, during the
period from 16 to 23 October 2000, you were in an unauthorized
absence (UA) status on two occasions for six days. The record
does not, however, reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any,
for this misconduct.
On 17 March 2001 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) fora
49 day period of UA, failure to go to your appointed place of
duty, and missing the movement of your ship. The punishment
imposed was a $300 forfeiture of pay and restriction and extra
duty for 20 days.
During the period from 17 March 2001 to 14 November 2002 you were
again UA on three more occasions for 22 days, and again the
record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken for this
misconduct. About a year later, on 4 November 2003, you received
NJP for dereliction of duty and were awarded extra duty for 30
days and a $695 forfeiture of pay.
On 1 August 2004 you submitted a written request for early
separation. Your commanding officer recommended your request be
approved, and on 2 August 2004 the discharge authority directed
an honorable discharge by reason of convenience of the government
due to a reduction in force. On 14 September 2005-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 assertion that your reenlistment code is in error
because you were honorably discharged by reason of reduction in
force. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because
of your repetitive misconduct and lengthy periods of UA which
resulted in two NJPs, and your multiple periods of UA for which
you did not receive disciplinary action. Finally, an RE-4
reenlistment code is authorized when a Sailor, who is serving in
paygrade E-2, is separated for this reason and is not recommended
for retention or reenlistment due to repeated disciplinary
incidents. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
You should contact the Department of the Navy, Navy Personnel
Command (BUPERS), Sailor Assistance Center, Code Pers-312F, 5720
Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055-3120, to request that
administrative corrections, such as your correct middle name,
address of record, and address of your nearest relative, be made
on your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD
Form 214).
Mh A an a seen ye ee ee os a A ae
tile ltaitedS alia VOLED OL LI
upon reques
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,
ie QOS Ee.
ROBERT D Cy SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12857-09
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. On 9 November 1994, you received your second NUP for failure to go to your appointed place of duty and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days and a $388 forfeiture of pay, which was suspended for six months. In this regard, the Board determined that a personal...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07996-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2008. On 30 March 2000 you again received NUP for wrongful use of marijuana and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 30 days, a reduction in paygrade, and a $1,000 forfeiture of pay. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04736-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07599-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 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. On 21 January 1966 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for an 85 day period of unauthorized absence (UA).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 07727-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considere@a your -application on 2 August 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07750-07
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TIR Docket No: 7750-07 20 August 2008 © your application for correction of your to the provisions of Title 10, United This is in reference t naval record pursuant States Code, Section 11552. From 25 to 29 May 1984 you were in a UA status for four days, but the record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this period of|UA. Consequently, when app ying for a correction of...
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01630-07
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 enlisted in the Navy on 9 March 1984 at age 18 and began a period of active duty on 22 March 1984....
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02645-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 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 | 07598-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2008. 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...