DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51900
REC
Docket No: 12133-09
30 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 25 August 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
8 August 1986, at age 19. On 19 November 1986, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for being disrespectful toward your
commanding officer, and a senior petty officer, failure to obey a
lawful order by consuming alcohol underage, communicating a
threat to a fellow Sailor, and failing to go to your appointed
place of duty. On 11 May 1987, you received NJP for the second
instance of being disrespectful in language, using provoking
words, and failure to obey a lawful order. On 6 June 1987, you
received your third NUP for eight instances of being absent from
your appointed place of duty. On 8 June 1987, administrative
separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct. You
waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your
commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of
misconduct. The discharge authority directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. On 18 June 1987,
you were so discharged. At that time you were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the
characterization of your discharge, given your record of three
NJP‘s for misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code
is required when an individual is discharged prior to the
expiration of his term of active obligated service for misconduct
and is not recommended for retention. The Board also noted that
you waived the right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a better characterization of service. 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,
L Wan }
W. DEAN PFE R
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01195-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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. The discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04135-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08418-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which recommended three to zero an other than honorable discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10524-09
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 9 September 1987, 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). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12135-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 2010. The discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP‘s and conviction by one SCM for misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04685-09
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. On 19 December 1985, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a four day period of unauthorized absence (UA) from your unit and dereliction of duty.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08261-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2011. 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 | 05981-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 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. On 24 August 1987, you received NIP for absence from your appointed place of duty.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05254-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Or your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policiés: After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03596-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2009. After waiving your right to cohsult with legal counsel and to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB), the discharge authority directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct, and on 8 April 1988, you were so discharged. Consequently,| when...