DEPARTMENT. OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 00136-09
26 October 2003
“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-tember panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on .16 October 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 23 July 1986, and served without
disciplinary incident. However, on 18 March 1992, you were
arrested by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) for
the alleged sexual abuse of a minor. On 18 July 1994, you were
separated at the end of active obligated service (EAOS) with an
honorable discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code.
In regard to the allegation of sexual assault of a minor, no
final disposition was ever reached by NCIS. Since you are only
now, over 20 years later, requesting a change to your
reenlistment code, there is no way of knowing what the reasons
were for it other than the alleged charge and that upon your
_EAOS, your case was still pending civilian court action.
Therefore, you were separated with an honorable discharge based
on your overall trait average of 3.83. However, your record and
reenlistment code are presumed to be correct without any
additional information to the contrary. The Board noted that an
RE-4 reenlistment code means that your commanding officer did not
recommend you for retention.
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.
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,
VQ eS
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02683-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2009. 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 | CY2002 | 06890-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The following day, your counsel responded that any Your counsel On 23 February 1998, the secretarial designee directed that your records be corrected to show that you were involuntarily discharged on 13 December 1995 by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04115-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 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 | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0500462
T he decision was four-to-one that the character and the narrative reason for discharge shall change, the Board voted three-to-two that the characterization should be general (under honorable conditions). After a thorough review of the records, the Board determined that the testimony of the 15-year-old neighbor, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) investigations, the DNA tests, and the Family Advocacy Case Review Committee (FA CRC) proceedings, all of which were presented to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR6538 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2014. 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 | CY2001 | 01920-01
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant existence of probable material error or injustice. - Form 149, Block (1) In the enclosure accompanying reference (a), (DD 9), the Subject makes the following contention: "I was separated from the U.S. Navy (Reserve) due to misconduct with a was found not guilty on all counts and was not allowed to plead my case before a court martial prior to separation." I (2) At the start of the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07081-05
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS» 2 NAVY ANNEX . Based on the foregoing, the Board concluded that no change to the discharge is warranted Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual receives a bad conduct 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 | 03927-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2009. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 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 | 05633-07
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 12 June 2006 at age 18. Your commanding officer stated, in part, that you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 02358-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2013. 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...