Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05960-10
Original file (05960-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TAL
Docket No: 5960-10
4 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 2 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 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

27 January 2004 at the age of 19. On 4 August 2004, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for unauthorized absence (UA) and
failure to go to your appointed place of duty. On 29 September
2004, you again received NUP for six instances of disobeying a
lawful regulation by underage drinking, fraternization and sexual
misconduct. You were notified of pending administrative
separation action by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of
misconduct. You waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a
statement or have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board (ADB). Your commanding officer forwarded his
recommendation that you be discharged under other than honorable
(OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The separation
authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due
to a pattern of misconduct. On 12 October 2004 you were so
discharged and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention)
reentry code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and prior
honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to waryant changing your reentry code
given the serifousness of your miscQhduct. The Board noted that
you waived the right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention or a better characterization of service. Finally, an
RE-4 reentry code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due
to misconduct. 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,

\ Noa
oe

Executive D

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11157-10

    Original file (11157-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2011. You waived your right to consult with counsel and 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 01357-11

    Original file (01357-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 2 November 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 | 05647-10

    Original file (05647-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 08642-10

    Original file (08642-10.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. You were notified that you were being recommended for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a pattern 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 | CY2010 | 02832-10

    Original file (02832-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2011 | 00086-11

    Original file (00086-11.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of two NUIP's, and conviction by a SCM of misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for...

  • 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 | 12050 11

    Original file (12050 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 22 August 2012. 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 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00288-12

    Original file (00288-12.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 September 2012. 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 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.