DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 6188-909
30 April 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the 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 28 April 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 oF
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
16 July 1990 at age 19. On 11 February 1993, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for provoking speech and gestures,
disrespect toward a superior officer, failiure to obey a lawful
order and disorderly conduct. On 24 December 1993 you were
apprehended by the civilian police department, in Oakland,
California, for aggravated battery and released to military
authority. On 15 January 1994, you received NUP for assault,
provoking speech and gestures and disorderly conduct. On
29 January 1994, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct. You waived your rights to consult counsel,
submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative
discharge board (ADB). Subsequently, your commanding officer
forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged under other
than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The
separation authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of
misconduct. On 5 April 1994 you were s0 discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge given the seriousness of your misconduct.
Finally, the Board noted that you waived the right to an ADB,
your best chance for retention or a better characterization of
service, 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,
W. DEAN PF
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12263-08
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 were advised that you were being administratively separated with .an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct and you waived your procedural right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12124-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 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. The discharge authority concurred and directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commigsion of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07476-01
Punishment imposed consisted of a suspended On 25 April 1995 you were notified that administrative separation action was being initiated to discharge you under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct and commission of a serious offense. present your case to an administrative discharge board You appeared before an ADB with counsel on 14 August 1995. The found you had committed misconduct due to ADB, by a vote of 3-0, a pattern of misconduct and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01030-11
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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00395-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2012. On 19 October 1992, you received the OTH discharge for misconduct (commission of a serious offense). 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 | CY2013 | NR5901 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 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 | CY2010 | 08392-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 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. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09261-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your misconduct and civil conviction. 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 ini usbice .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5309 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 14 May 2014. On 15 June 1995, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry 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 | CY2009 | 09226-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 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.