DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 5861-10
23 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 23 February 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You entered active duty in the Navy on 26 April 1985. You
received nonjudicial punishment on three occasions for wrongful
use of marijuana, unauthorized absence, disobeying a lawful
order (three specifications), and breaking restriction. You
were notified that your commanding officer was recommending you
for administrative separation with a conditions under other
than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. You waived
your procedural right to an administrative discharge board
(ADB). On 23 March 1988, you received a conditions under OTH
discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not
recommended for retention) reenlistment code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
desire to improve your life. However, the Board concluded that
your discharge should not be changed due to your numerous acts
of misconduct. The Board found that you waived your right to
an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. You are advised that no discharge
is upgraded automatically due solely to the passage of time or
post service gogd conduct. 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 materialtevidence 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,
W. DEAN R
Executiv \ tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05853-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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
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 | CY2010 | 05880-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2011. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10906-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2011. On 23 February 1988, you were discharged with an OTH characterization of service due to misconduct (civil conviction), and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00060-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 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 an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10085-10
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 21 February 1989, after more than two years of honorable service. 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 | 05647-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05427-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05108-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. On 18 August 1988, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct for drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05808-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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...