Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04310-10
Original file (04310-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BAN
Docket No: 04310-10
31 January 2011

 

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 20 January 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,
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 13 July 1988, and served without
disciplinary incident. However, at the end of your obligated

service, you were not recommended for reenlistment. On 14
February 1992, you received an adverse evaluation in which you
were not recommended for advancement. Therefore, on 10 July

 

1992, you were separated with an honorable discharge and an RE-4
reentry code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your claim that your honorable discharge does not coincide with
your RE-4 reentry code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry
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 Ln justice.

Sincerely,

W. DEAN PFEIFFE
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05119-10

    Original file (05119-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC Docket No: 05119-10 10 February 2011 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 9 February 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03760-10

    Original file (03760-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval, Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to 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 | CY2011 | 00058-11

    Original file (00058-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 4 January 1993, the discharge authority directed the OTH discharge by reason of a pattern of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07274-10

    Original file (07274-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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 | CY2010 | 03843-10

    Original file (03843-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to one in Favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05164-10

    Original file (05164-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09753-10

    Original file (09753-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 recharacterization of your discharge and reentry code given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUJPs and your admission of participation in homosexual acts with other Marines on a marine...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06559-10

    Original file (06559-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2011. 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, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged at the expiration of his term of active obligated service and is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04435-10

    Original file (04435-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 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. Your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to one in favor of an administrative honorable discharge due to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07985-10

    Original file (07985-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. On 5 January 1993, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an OTH discharge due to...