DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 12326-10
7 April 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 16 February 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.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Navy on 10 August
1993. On 3 October 1996 you received nonjudicial punishment for
two periods of unauthorized absence and making a false efficial
statement. On 22 October 1996 you were concerning your failure
to pay just debts and later counseled as to your failure to go to
appointed place of duty and insubordination.
On 6 December 1996 your commanding officer recommended that you
be separated from the Navy with a general discharge by reason of
misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. After
review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for
separation was approved and on 20 December 1996 you were
separated with a general discharge.
The Board carefully considered your contention to the effect that
your discharge should be upgraded because you were discharged due
to a one time act of financial misconduct, and the passage of
time, but it found those factors insufficient to warrant any
corrective action in your case. Accordingly, and as you have not
demonstrated that your discharge is erroneous or unjust, 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,
Yo aac
W. DEAN PFEIIRFE
Executive Dilfrac
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01121-11
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 BIG Docket No: 1121-11 31 October 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. The Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service,since an other than honorable discharge is normally assigned when an individual is found to have committed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR647 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2013. In addition, the Board considered the report of the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB), dated 25 April 1990, a copy of which is attached. The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service, since individuals who are separated due to misconduct normally receive other than honorable discharges.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08559-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2011. Further, there is no evidence which demonstrates that you suffered from a mental disorder that warranted a medical separation or retirement discharge. 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 04424-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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. The Board found that on 10 November 1995, you were counseled regarding your behavior, and warned that further misconduct could result in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01158-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. The record does not reflect the disciplinary action taken, if any, for this misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00159-11
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 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07489-02
Your allegations of error and 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. Therefore, the Board concluded Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03660-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2011. You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 27 June 1995 at age 19 and began a period of active duty on 5 July 1995. The Board believed that had you not began your second period of UA for 114 days, you could have presumably been processed for separation based on the recommendation from medical authorities regarding your mental condition and your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03855-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 February 2011. Nevertheless, the Board found these factors were insufficient to warrant changing your reentry code due to your diagnosed personality disorder. 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.