DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR GORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX REC
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 00985-11
2 November 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 2 November 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 and began a period of active duty on -
4 December 2007, in the nuclear propulsion program. On 6 March
2008, you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for failure to
obey an order/regulation by wrongfully allowing a fellow Sailor
to copy your homework. On 14 March 2008, you were disenrolled
from the nuclear propulsion training program. On 21 March 2008,
you were advised that your commanding officer was recommending
you for administrative separation with an uncharacterized entry
level separation and a reentry code of RE-4 due to misconduct. .
You waived all of your procedural rights, including your right to
an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 28 March 2008, you
were so Gischarged. At that time you were assigned an RE-4
reentry code as you were not recommended for retention.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change of the reentry code, given
your record of one NUP for a serious offense. In this regard, an
RE-4 reentry code is appropriately assigned 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,
La Wong
W. DEAN PF
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01048-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 June 2009. If the DFC is approved, the date of AQD removal is that of the original suspension, As a result of the DFC approval, <0 nuclear AQDs were removed effective the date. This action was concurred in by the Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program’s (CNO NOON).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00223-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. However, the Board found these factors were insufficient to warrant changing your reentry code due to your two NUP’s, and being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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 | 00895-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure and commission of a serious offense.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0649 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2014. 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 separated on 15 July 2011, with an honorable discharge due to non-retention on active duty and assigned an RE-3C (when directed by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0258 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application-on 12 March 2014. The fact that civil authorities dismissed the charge of DUI does not invalidate the NUP you received for this: offense. 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 | 06937-10
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 probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03901-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2002. petitioner did not receive the zone reference (b) because he was selected for the NECP. The petitioner request SRB payment based on SRB eligibility effective the date of reenlistment and after his release from the NECP.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2591 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on | 18 March 2014. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05457-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2011. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regul@ions and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, the Board concluded that neither your reentry code nor your separation code should be changed due your NUP for larceny. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to receive a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05960-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 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...