DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 5899-10
3 March 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 1 March 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 poLicise .
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 6 February 1968. You
received nonjudicial punishment for improper grooming. You
were convicted by civil authorities in San Diego, California,
of sexual perversion and sentenced to three years probation
were notified that you were being administratively separated
due to misconduct (civil conviction) with a general
characterization of service. On 2 March 1972, you were
discharged under honorable conditions due to misconduct bay
conviction), and 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.
However, the Board concluded that your separation code of 284
(civil conviction) should not be changed due to your
misconduct. The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a
general discharge, since Sailors who are administratively
separated for misconduct such as yours normally receive an
other than honorable characterization of service. In view of
the above, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
eee i i
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 offiedal
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 | 06835-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 2011. You were notified that you were being processed for administrative separation due to misconduct (civil conviction). 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 | 00082-11
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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your record of two...
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 | CY2010 | 07529-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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 | CY2013 | NR4351 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a ‘civil conviction and that you were no longer qualified for submarine service... The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since Sailors who are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00830-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2011. You exercised your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | 04857-10
Additionally, you were counseled and warned after your first NIP, that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. The discharge authority concurred and directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug use. 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 | 06952-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | CY2010 | 09261-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your misconduct and civil conviction. 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 ini usbice .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07609-10
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. An average of 4.0 in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a fully honorable characterization of service. Further, Marines with an extensive record of misconduct, such as yours, normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such the Board noted...