DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 00060-11
29 September 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 28 September 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 on 17 November 1987. Prior to entering
active duty, on 17 August 1987, you were convicted by civilian
authorities of stealing, and required to pay court costs of
$78.50. On 2 March 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment
(NTP) for being drunk on duty. On 27 October 1988, you received
NJP for failure to obey a lawful order, and two incidents of
assauit. On 23 January 1989, you received NUP for failure to
obey a lawful order, and breaking restriction. On 24 January
1989, you were advised that your commanding officer was
recommending you for administrative separation with an other than
honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. You waived all of
your procedural rights, including your right to an administrative
discharge board (ADB). On 25 January 1989, your commanding
officer forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged under
OTH conditions by reason of misconduct. The discharge authority .
directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct (commission of
a serious offense). On 5 February 1989, 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 one
civil conviction, and three NUP's for misconduct. In this
regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual
is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for
retention. The Board also noted that you waived the right to an
ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a better
characterization of service. 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,
Lo Wak :
W. DEAN PFE E
Executive Directo
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03833-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 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. 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 | CY2010 | 10654-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 August 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10651-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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. 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 | CY2010 | 04298-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2011. You were recommended for 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 | 06979-10
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. 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 | 03608-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 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. At that time you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03822-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your — application on 26 January 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. 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 | CY2010 | 08318-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 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 | CY2012 | 00923 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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 is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00619-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 2010. 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.