DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 10909-09
13 July 2010
Dear Sypamiutticay
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 13 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 13 August 1984. You received nonjudicial
punishment on five occasions for failure to obey a lawful order
(three specifications), disrespect, making a false official
statement (two specifications), dereliction in the performance
of your duties, and the wrongful use of cocaine. You were
counseled and warned on three occasions that further misconduct
could result in administrative separation. You were notified
that your commanding officer was recommending you for
administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH)
discharge due to misconduct (commission of a serious offense
(COSO)). You waived all of your procedural rights, including
your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 9
May 1986, you received an OTH discharge due to misconduct
(COSO), and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
desire for a better discharge. However, the Board concluded
that your discharge should not be changed due to your
misconduct and drug-related offenses. The Board noted that you
committed further offenses after being counseled and warned
that further misconduct could result in administrative
Separation. The Board found that you waived your right to an
ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. In view of the above, 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,
\QuS “
W. DEAN PF
Executive D ar
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08760-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 June 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6981 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application 29 July 2014. On 13 January 1988, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct (COSO), and were assigned an RE-4 (not. 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 | 00623-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12640-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2010. You waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2011 | 01828-11
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2011. 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...
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 | CY2010 | 10195-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 2011. Your commanding officer agreed with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and on 4 March 2010, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service due to misconduct {COSO) , and 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06923-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 March 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In order to have your social security number corrected on your DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), you need to contact the Naval Personnel Command (NPC) and...
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 | CY2012 | 02314-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2013. 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...