Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05162-10
Original file (05162-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 05162-10

20 January 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 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 and began a period of active duty on

13 August 1985. Between 6 August 1986 and 11 June 1987, you
received three nonjudicial punishments (NJP's). You committed
the following offenses: being in an unauthorized absence (UA)
status on three occasions totaling two days and seven hours, two
‘ngtances of failure to go to your appointed place of duty, and
breaking restriction. You were advised that your commanding
officer was recommending you for administrative separation with
an other than honorable discharge due to misconduct. You waived
all of your procedural rights, including your right to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 26 October 1987, your
commanding officer forwarded his recommendation that you be
discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason st
misconduct. The discharge authority directed an other than
honorable discharge by reason of misconduct. On 18 November
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, conduct,
and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found
that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your

characterization of your discharge, given your record of three
NJP’s for misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code
igs required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and
ig 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,

Yen

W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01068-11

    Original file (01068-11.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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06381-10

    Original file (06381-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | 05870-10

    Original file (05870-10.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 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08424-09

    Original file (08424-09.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. The discharge authority directed 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 to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05126-09

    Original file (05126-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00847-11

    Original file (00847-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 October 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is discharged due to misconduct.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09083-10

    Original file (09083-10.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. The discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct (commission of a serious offense). In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05160-09

    Original file (05160-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. 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 | 04720-10

    Original file (04720-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 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 | CY2011 | 05182-11

    Original file (05182-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval © Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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...