DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC
Docket No: 06600-10
18 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 17 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 Marine Corps and began active duty on 15
April 1980, at age 20. Between 8 March and 28 October 1981, you
received six nonjudicial punishments (NUJP’s) and committed the
following offenses: being in an unauthorized absence (UA) status
on four occasions, being absent from your appointed place of
duty, two incidents of failure to obey a lawful order,
dereliction in the performance of your duties, appearing to
muster out of the uniform of the day, and appearing before the
commanding officer in a dirty uniform. On 12 March 1982,
administrative separation action was initiated by reason 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
conditions (OTH) by reason of misconduct. On 2 April 1982, the
discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of
misconduct (frequent involvement). On 7 May 1982, 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 the
characterization of your discharge, given your record of six
NUP’s for misconduct. You are advised that an RE-4 reenlistment
code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct
and is not recommended for retention. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00256 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 October 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 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and 4s not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02748-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 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 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00210-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. 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 | 12188-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 23 March 1983, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06974-10
DA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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 | 05801-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | 06601-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 March 2011. On 14 May 1984, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse). 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 | CY2008 | 10065-08
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. On 23 August 1984, you were notified of pending administrative separation action for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to a pattern of misconduct (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities), and an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06982-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your separation code due to your frequent 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 | 05787-10
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. On 4 April 1985, your case was heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB), which voted three to zero in favor of an other than honorable...