DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 10588-08
17 August 2069
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 13 August 2009. 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 4 October 1990, and served without
disciplinary incident until 30 October 1991, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for obtaining services under false
pretenses. Additionally, on 20 March 1992, you received another
NJP for three specifications of unauthorized absence. You were
recommended for separation as a seaman apprentice (pay grade E-2)
with an honorable discharge. The separation authority approved
the recommendation and on 17 July 1992, you were separated with
an honorable discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your
failure to meet professional growth criteria.
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 a change to your reenlistment code due
your misconduct and failure to meet professional growth criteria.
Furthermore, the Board believed that considerable leniency was
extended to you to allow you to be separated with an honorable
discharge instead of a lesser discharge due to a pattern of
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,
Executive Dirkcto
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11034-06
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 Naval Reserve on 28 April 1992 at age 17 and began a period of active duty on 28...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05958-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 18 December 2001. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3 February 1996 you were You were Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are not recommended for reenlistment or who fail to meet the professional growth criteria for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00090-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2009. On 29 October 1993, you were separated at the end of your obligated service with an honorable discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | 00371-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. 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 | CY2009 | 05255-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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. You were released from active duty on 25 January 1996 and transferred to the Navy Reserve and assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02092-08
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because of your disciplinary record which resulted in two NUPs, failure of professional growth criteria, and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5398 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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 | CY2011 | 02426-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 November 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. On 15 September 1994, while you were serving in paygrade E-2, you were honorably released from active duty, transferred to the inactive Navy...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00171 12
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. An individual separated in paygrade E-3 who fails to meet the above criteria may receive an RE-3R reenlistment code if he/she is recommended for advancement to paygrade E-4 at the time of separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03647-06
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.Although your record is incomplete, it does show that you enlisted in the Navy on 21 October 1987 and...