DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC
Docket No: 00500-10
22 September 2010
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 22 September 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. In this regard, the Board substantially concurred
with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
You enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 15 August 2002, and began
active duty on 5 August 2003, at age 19. On 15 February 2005,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a
lawful order, larceny, and wrongful appropriation. On 1 March
2005, you failed to obey a lawful order. However, your chain of
command chose to take no disciplinary action against you. On
14 March 2005, you were notified that administrative discharge
procedures were initiated and that you would receive a
reenlistment code of RE-4 for your pattern of misconduct upon
your separation. The discharge authority directed a general
discharge by reason of misconduct. You were so discharged on
18 March 2005.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity. However, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your RE-4
reenlistment code or character of service, given your record of
one NUP for misconduct. The Board noted that you were fortunate
to receive a general discharge since a discharge under other than
honorable conditions is often directed when an individual is
found to have committed misconduct. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The Board found that since your discharge is less than 15 years
old you are entitled to submit the attached Application for the
Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the
United States (DD Form 293) to the Naval Council of Personnel
Review Boards, Attention: Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB),
720 Kennon Street, SE, Room 309, Washington Navy Yard,
Washington, DC 20375-5023, for consideration of an upgrade of
your discharge and a change in your narrative reason for
separation.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07959-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2010. On 15 August 2005, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial. As a result of this action on 2 November 2005 you were discharged under OTH conditions.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02605-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2010. The Board noted that applicable regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are separated due to misconduct of serious offenses. 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 | 13247-09
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. On 31 August 2005, you were so discharged. 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 | 02574-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Recotds, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In March 1988 a second Navy Mental Health evaluation was conducted and you were diagnosed with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity syndrome, tinea pedis, and alcohol dependence, and directed to complete your confinement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08313-09
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. 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 | 08313-09
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. 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 | 05144-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 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. You were reactivated in the Marine Corps from 14 July 2004 to 15 March 2005, in support of Operation Noble Eagle/Enduring Freedom, in which you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03173-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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 | 00449-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. However, on 15 April 1971, you received your fourth NUP for being in a UA status.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05643-09
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. On 24 October 1981, you received NUP for a second failure to obey a lawful order. 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.