Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09368-09
Original file (09368-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRS

Docket No: 9368-09
12 November 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 10 November 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 10 August 1992.
On 18 August 1993 you received nonjudicial punishment for absence
from appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order.
On 6 December 1993 you were diagnosed as having a personality
disorder and on 9 December 1993 you received nonjudicial
punishment for absence from appointed place of duty. On 16
February 1994 you received a discharge under other than honorable
conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a
serious offense and were assigned a reentry code of RE-4.

 

The Board carefully considered your contention to the effect that
your reentry code should be corrected because of your emotional
state during training at Nuclear Power School. The Board
concluded, however, that as the assignment of a reentry code of
RE-4 is required when an individual is discharged by reason of
misconduct, there is no basis for any corrective action in your
case. 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,
Lindo
W

. DEAN PFE
Executive Di or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09131-09

    Original file (09131-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. The Board concluded that those factors were insufficient to warrant a change in the reason for discharge, given your disciplinary record, Applicable regulations normally require the assignment of an RE-4 reentry code to individuals who are not recommended for reenlistment. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01342-09

    Original file (01342-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 August 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, reguiations and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10691-10

    Original file (10691-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 1 November-1993, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. On 32 January 1994, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5133 13

    Original file (NR5133 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2014. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be upgraded due to your numerous acts of 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10735-10

    Original file (10735-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC Decket No: 10735-10 18 August 2011 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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01223-10

    Original file (01223-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2010. On 1 February 1997, you were discharged and received an other than honorable characterization of service by reason of your 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 or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR021 14

    Original file (NR021 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. An RE-4 reentry code is required when a Marine is discharged due to misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02203-09

    Original file (02203-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 aii 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 | CY2010 | 04870-09

    Original file (04870-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail 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 | 04238-09

    Original file (04238-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2010. On 10 May 1988, you received NIP for UA from you appointed place of duty. 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.