DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX |
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 4238-09
12 March 2010
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 3 March 2010. 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 and began a period of active on 7
January 1987 at age 22. On 25 August 1987, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA) from
your unit for a period of three days. On 10 May 1988, you
received NIP for UA from you appointed place of duty. On 27 June
1988, you received NUP for UA from you appointed place of duty.
On 19 June 1989, you received NUP for UA from you appointed place
of duty and two instances of insubordinate conduct toward a petty
officer. On 19 July 1990, you received NIP for disrespect toward
a petty officer. On 27 December 1990, within three months of the
completion of your required active service, you were honorably
released from active duty and transferred to the Navy Reserve.
You were not recommended for retention or reenlistment and were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 19 December 1994, at the
expiration of your enlistment, you were honorably discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to change your reenlistment code for
possible reentry into the armed forces. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your reenlistment code because of your misconduct and the
nonrecommendation for reenlistment which was sufficient to
support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Accordingly, your applicatiorn™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,
\SQud
W. DEAN PF
Executive D Cc
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01195-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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. The discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00468 12
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 §. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12133-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10118-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2011. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the, burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existencetof probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02392-09
RK three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2010. Documentary material congidered 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 23 March 1988 you received NUP for two periods of UA totalling two days, failure to obey a lawful order, and four periods of absence from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05796-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 14 June 1979, you received NUP for being disrespectful toward you a chief petty officer on two occasions, and failure to obey a written regulation. On 17 February 1983, after appellate review, you received the BCD.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11672-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02730-09
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 20 August 1988, you received NIP for four instances of UA, and failure to go to your appointed placed of duty. On 22 August 1988 you were so discharged.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01712-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01014-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application.on 9 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...