DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 01488-08
2 October 2008
This igs 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 30 September 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 on 20 September 1978, and served without
disciplinary incident until February 1979, when you received a
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to obey a lawful order.
Shortly thereafter, you reenlisted on 13 January 1982. On
10 July 1986, you received another NJP for an unauthorized
absence, however, the punishment was suspended. On 11 September
1987, your punishment was vacated due to further misconduct. On
23 September 1987, you received another NJP for willfully
disobeying a noncommissioned officer.
On 13 January 1988, you were discharged at the end of your
enlistment and received an honorable discharge, and an RE-4
reenlistment code, due to your previous disciplinary actions.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, including your allegations of racism and prejudice.
However, your honorable discharge was based on the type warranted
by your service record, which reflected your work performance
while in the Navy. The fact that you were allowed to stay in the
Navy until the end of your enlistment instead of being separated
for a pattern of misconduct or for commission of a serious
offense, due to your numerous NJP’s, shows no indication of
prejudice or vindictiveness. Hence, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your
reenlistment code 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,
Ly Waa
W. DEAN PFRI R
Executive ctor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00259-08
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. Shortly thereafter, you received the following disciplinary actions: In October 1986, an NUP for unauthorized absence (UA), in May 1987, another NJP for being UA again, and in September 1987, an NUP for UA and for disobeying a lawful order. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04503-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 February 2008. You were also in a UA status during the period from 1 to 5 September 1989. 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 | 01375-08
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 | CY2010 | 00373-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. 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 | CY2007 | 08856-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 September 2008. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06765-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. On 20 November 1986 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a failure to go to your appointed place of duty and were reduced to petty officer second class. At that time, you had completed 17 years, 11 months and 10 days of active service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01871-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 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. 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 | CY2008 | 00449-08
A three-member panel of the Board f © Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive sessi n, considered your application on 3 September 2008. yY ur allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordan¢e 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02760-07
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 4 October 1983 at age 19 and served for nearly a year without disciplinary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08759-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...