DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 00452-08
27 August 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 27 August 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 o
your application, together with all material submitted in suppor
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 in July 1989 and served without
disciplinary incident until April 1991, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for misconduct due to drug usage.
On May 1991, you were screened by the drug and alcohol program
advisor (DAPA) for drug dependency and were found not dependent.
On June 1991, you requested an administrative discharge board,
where it was recommended that you be separated under other than
honorable (UOTH) conditions with an RE-4 reenlistment code. On
September 1991, the discharge authority approved these
recommendations and directed a discharge UOTH conditions with an
RE-4 reenlistment code, and on 17 September 1991, you were so
ischarged.
f
t
f
9
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of the seriousness of your 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,
W. DEAN PPEL
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00338-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2008. 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. 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 | CY2007 | 08844-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 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. However, on 4 November 1991, the separation authority directed that you be separated with a discharge warranted by your service record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06102-07
On 15 December 1993, the separation authority approved the separation recommendation and directed a UD by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. On 4 January 1994, you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to members who are discharged by reason of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03832-08
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. Based on the dependency diagnosis, you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of a void 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 | CY2008 | 01333-08
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. The separation authority approved this recommendation, and on 29 May 1992, you were so discharged. 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 | 11112-07
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. However, it further noted that a reservist can be administratively separated by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, such as in your case.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01876-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. You were notified of your processing for administrative separation due to misconduct with a recommendation for an under other than honorable (UOTH) conditions discharge. 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 | CY2008 | 01445-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. You were notified of your processing for administrative separation due to misconduct with a recommendation for an under other than honorable (UOTH) conditions discharge. 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 | CY2008 | 00960-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | CY2008 | 02243-08
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. Given your diagnoses that resulted in discharge after about three months of active service and since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board could not find an error or injustice in the entry level separation or assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code. ...