DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
* 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
REC
Docket No: 06222-11
22 March 2012
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 21 March 2012. 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 31 August 1981. On 22 March 1982,
you received nonjudicial punishment (NOP) for being in an
unauthorized absence (UA) status on four occasions. On 26 March
1982, you were advised that your commanding officer was
recommending you for administrative separation with an other
than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct
(unsuitability). You waived all of your procedural rights,
including your right to an administrative discharge board (ADB).
On 7 April 1982, the discharge authority directed the OTH
discharge by reason of unsuitability. On 16 April 1982, 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 record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your
characterization of service, given your record of NJP for
misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is
required when an individual is discharged for unsuitability and
is not recommended for retention. The Board noted that you
waived your 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,
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 | 02748-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 January 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 04964-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. 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 | CY2011 | 04960-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 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. 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 | CY2010 | 06564-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2010 | 06974-10
DA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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 | CY2010 | 06982-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 2011. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your separation code due to your frequent 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 | CY2012 | 01151 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 3 April 1987, you received the OTH discharge due to misconduct (drug abuse (use)). 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 | 01842-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 2009. 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.