DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BDC 20370-51700 .
TUR
Docket No: 9683-08
13 August 2009
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 11 August 2009. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 19 October 1994 at age 23 and served
without disciplinary incident until 31 May 1995, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order.
About six months later, on 5 and 30 November 1995, you received
NUP for wrongful solicitation with indecent exposure and five
periods of failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. After consulting with legal counsel you elected
your right to present your case to an administrative discharge
board (ADB). On 19 December 1995 an ADB recommended discharge
under honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to
commission of a serious offense. On 21 January 1996 your
commanding officer also recommended discharge under honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct. On 7 March 1996 the
discharge authority approved the foregoing recommendations and
directed your commanding officer to issue you a general discharge
by reason of misconduct, and on 25 March 1996, you were so
discharged and were 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 desire to change your narrative reason for separation and
reenlistment code so that you may reenlist. It also considered
your letter of explanation. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your
narrative reason for separation or reenlistment code because of
the seriousness of your misconduct which resulted in three NUPs.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
Ls, 0
W. DEAN PF R
Executive % or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02464-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 2009. 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 | 02082-08
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. Subsequently, on 20 December 1991, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR517 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2015. Despite stating that you were dealing with PTSD while on active duty, the Board determined it insufficient to warrant relief since there is no evidence in the record to support your assertion of PTSD. 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 | 09225-07
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, on 9 June 1995, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to go to your appointed place of duty.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6421 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 2014. 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 | 12456-08
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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Branch (MMER/RE), a copy of which is attached. Subsequently, on 23 January 2001, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03641-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08196-01
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. of the recommendation, your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2009 | 02393-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8891 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2014. 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. You received restriction, extra duty and a forfeiture of pay.