DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TUR
Docket No: 4678-11
16 February 2012
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 12 February 2012. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
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
injuatics.
You enlisted in the Navy on 29 January 1982 at age 18 and began a
period of active duty on 14 July 1982. Although your record is
incomplete, it appears that during the period from 6 March to 7
June 1984, you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status for 94
days and were declared a deserter. Subsequently, you were
processed for an administrative separation by reason of
misconduct. As such, on 30 July 1984, you were issued an other
than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct and were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your record, although incomplete, and
application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating
factors, such as your youth, desire to upgrade your discharge,
and assertion of despair at the time of your mother’s death.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge
because of your lengthy period of UA from the Navy. Accordingly,
your application has been denied.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00904 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. On 31 January 1983, you were again UA for 20 days with no disciplinary action taken by your chain of command. 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 | CY2011 | 02243-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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 | CY2001 | 04398-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, although incomplete, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 24 May 1979 you received your fourth NJP for drunk and The punishment imposed was restriction for Your record also reflects that on 31 July 1979 you began a 121 day period of UA that was not terminated until you were apprehended by civil authorities on 29 November...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00207 12
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 9 March 1984, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. 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 | CY2012 | 00617 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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. On 21 March 1984, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable (OTH) discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04860-06
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 show that a psychiatric evaluation diagnosed you with a personality disorder and prescribed appropriate treatment, but you began a period of UA several months later. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00256 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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 4s not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12188-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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. Subsequently, your request for discharge was granted and, on 23 March 1983, you received an OTH discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08967-06
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.On 8 June 1982 you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. On 25 June 1984 you received NJP for these two...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7674 14_Redacted
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2015. 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. 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...