DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 SIN
Docket No: 09168-07
3 November 2008
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 28 October 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
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
7 March 2007 at age 22. On 2 April 2007, while in recruit
training, you began a period of unauthorized absence (UA) that
lasted 96 days, ending on 7 July 2007. On 12 July 2007, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for that period of UA. You
received restriction, extra duty, and a forfeiture of pay.
On 20 July 2007, your commanding officer initiated administrative
separation action. You elected not to submit a statement and
requested copies of the documents that were forwarded concerning
your separation. On 26 July 2007, your case was forwarded
directing that you be discharged with an entry level separation
due to misconduct. You were so discharged on 8 August 2007. At
that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and short
period of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your
reenlistment code given your NUP for a period of UA lasting over
three months while in recruit training. Further, an RE-4
reenlistment code must be assigned to all individuals separated
during recruit training 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
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09703-07
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. The Board noted that applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are separated due to erroneous enlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04910-07
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 Marine Corps on 8 November 2005 at age 21. Subsequently, you were convicted by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03845-07
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 25 July 2000 at age 19. Because you requested discharge in lieu of trial,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06574-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2008. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code given your conviction by SPCM for a period of UA lasting over a year. 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 | CY1999 | 05065-09
On 7 July 2008, a second mental health evaluation was conducted to confirm the previous results with no change. Based on the mental health evaluation, you were processed for separation by reason of a diagnosed personality disorder. 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 | 09187-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2008. The Board noted that applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are separated due to erroneous enlistment. 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 | CY2010 | 06038-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 June 2010. 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 | CY2004 | 00346-04
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 11 May 1988 after more than two years of honorable service. You...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08338-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2011. The Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your reentry code which was correctly assigned under your circumstances. 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 | 03554-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 January 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 23 June 1989, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.