DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Decket No: 07263-09
27 May 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 27 May 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 on 5 June 1991, and served without
disciplinary incident until 7 July 1992, when you received
- nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order,
making a false official statement, larceny, and failure to pay
just debts. Shortly thereafter, on 8 July 1992, you received
another NJP for an attempt to defraud the government, and false
official statement. You were recommended for separation due to
your commission of a serious offense. You waived all of your
procedural rights, to include your right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). The separation authority approved the
recommendation for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge.
Therefore, on 14 August 1992, you were separated with an OTH
discharge and 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 youth and the passage of time. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing
the characterization of your discharge due to your commission of
a serious offense. Furthermore, the Board found you waived your
right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. Finally, there is no provision of
law or in regulations that allow for recharacterization of
service due solely to the passage of time. 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 E
Executive D or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00271-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 2010. the Board did not;consider whether to upgrade your discharge or Change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11373-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct due to commission...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12250 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your discharge due to your COSO: Furthermore, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07257-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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 | CY2011 | 01393-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 2011. On 28 April 1992, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct (COSO), 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 | 11339-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2010. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. @onsequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the yexistence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00394-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00318-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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. You waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09503-09
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. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4094-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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...