DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 10464-09
7 July 2010
bear ily
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 1 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 entered active duty in the Navy on 11 March 1997, and served
without disciplinary incident until 8 January 1998, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for an unauthorized absence
in excess of 18 days. On 21 April 1998, you were separated with
a general discharge due to a pattern of misconduct and assigned
an RE-4 reenlistment code. Although there are no documents in
your record to reflect additional NUJP’s or disciplinary issues,
your record is viewed as accurate based on the presumption of
regularity unless you provide evidence contrary to this. The
Board noted that you signed your DD Form 214 which states that
you were discharged due to a pattern of misconduct.
Therefore, the Board, in its review of your entire record and
application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors, such as your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your
reenlistment code. 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,
\ Sek
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11791-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 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 | 10333-09
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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. Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13131-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. After your first NUP, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern 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 | CY2002 | 07237-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01742-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. 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 | 01683-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. However, while waiting to be separated from naval service, you went UA and continued in a UA status until you were discharged in absentia on 12 July 1991, with an OTH discharge and an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code due to a pattern of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09291-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 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 | 10712-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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. Consequetitly, 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 | 09594-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 July 2010. You continued to serve without disciplinary incident until 6 October 1994, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for larceny and wrongful appropriation. 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 | 10444-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2010. 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. 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...