DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TAL
Docket No: 10442-10
19 October 2010
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 14 October 2010. 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
2 December 2009 at age 18. On 2 April 2010, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for larceny of various items from
the Navy Exchange of a value totaling over $900. Based on the
information currently contained in your record it appears that
you were subsequently involuntarily processed for an entry level
separation. In connection with this processing, you would have
acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority
would have approved a recommendation for separation. The record
clearly shows that on 27 April 2010, you were discharged with an
entry level separation due to misconduct. At that time you were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, which means that you were
neither recommended nor eligible for reenlistment.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your
reenlistment code given the seriousness or your misconduct.
Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment 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.
n this regard, it is»important to keep in mind that a
fresunt ion of regularity attaches to all official records.
@onsequently, 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,
\ sais
W. DEAN P
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12297-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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 | CY2010 | 00840-10
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 were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code on 13 October 2009. 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 | 06170-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2010. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for separation. 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 | CY2009 | 10829-09
AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 July 2010. On 18 June 1992, you were discharged from active duty with an entry level separation and were assigned an RE-4 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 or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00320-11
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13210-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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 | CY2010 | 11028-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. As a result of this action, on 16 August 2001, you submitted a written request for an administrative separation due to parenthood.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04418-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 May 2010. On 19 July 1999, you were discharged from active duty with an entry level separation and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code based on your performance and conduct. 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 | 11433-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2011. You were notified of the recommendation that you be discharged with an uncharacterized separation due to entry level performance and conduct. 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 | CY2009 | 13095-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 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...