DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 7060-10
23 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.
AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 22 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You entered the Marine Corps Reserve on 17 April 1986. On 30
May 1989, you were notified that your commanding officer was
recommending you for administrative separation with an under
conditions other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to
unsatisfactory performance in the ready reserve (missing 32
drills). You waived all of your procedural rights, including
your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 2
1
August 1989, you received an under conditions OTH discharge due
to unsatisfactory performance, 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
alleged family issue. The Board concluded, however, that your
discharge should not be upgraded due to your unsatisfactory
performance. 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 due merely to the passage of time or post service
good 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 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 ail e@ffteial
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,
\rouk
W. DEAN PFEIL
Executive Di
\
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06223-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2011. On 15 February 1994, you were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to unsatisfactory participation. 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 | CY2013 | NR6629 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 2014. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Naval Discharge Review Board, dated 28 October 2004, a copy of which is attached. You waived your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08558-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11146-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 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 | 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 | 10392-10
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. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your misconduct and 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 or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12230-10
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. On 19 February 1991, you received an OTH conditions characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10347-10
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. The Board concluded, however, that your discharge should not be upgraded due to your lengthy UA. 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 | 01119-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 October 2011. You were then notified that your commanding officer was recommending you for administrative separation with an other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02704-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 December 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.