DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX SIN
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 10327-09
3 August 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 27 July 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 duty on
20 November 2007. The Board found that your record reflects you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) on 12 December 2007 for
assault. You received a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and
extra duty. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was
initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense. After being informed of your procedural rights, it was
directed that you be separated with an other than honorable
@ischarge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious
offense. On 8 January 2008, you were so discharged. At that
time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to change your RE-4 reenlistment code.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant such a change in your reenlistment code
‘given your NIP for a very serious offense. 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,
Lyd SQ
W. DEAN PF
Executive Dipetctto
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02505-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 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. Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01403-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 son Docket No: 01403-10 25 February 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. 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 | CY2009 | 12297-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09776-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your haval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02327-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 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 | 10244-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 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 | 12420-09
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code given your SPCM conviction for very serious offenses. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06293-06
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 31 August 2004 at age 19 and served without disciplinary incident until 21...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04001-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 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 | 11010-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval: Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. On 22 June 2007 you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to 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.