DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
REC
Docket No: 00255-12
27 September 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 26 September 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 15 January 1991, at age 22. You
served honorably for over four years. On 21 September 1995, you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for uttering worthless
checks. On 26 September 1995, administrative separation action
was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. You requested to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 13 November 1995, an
ADB was conducted and recommended that you receive a general
characterization of service discharge due to misconduct and your
failure to correct your financial situation. Your commanding
officer agreed with the ADB and forwarded his recommendation
that you receive a general discharge. The discharge authority
directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct. On 9
January 1996, you were so discharged. At that time you were
assigned an RE-4 reentry code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
characterization of service, given your record of a NUP for
misconduct. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required
when an individual has committed misconduct and is not
recommended for retention. The Board believed you were
fortunate to have received a general discharge considering the
misconduct you committed. 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,
Executive Dire
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 10173 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 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 8 September 1995, your case was heard and the ADB recommended that you receive an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03553-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03524-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. On 26 September 1991, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07529-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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 | CY2013 | NR8265 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 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. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2692 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive gession, considered your application on 9 December 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. 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 | 00295-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00288-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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 reentry code is required when an individual is discharged for misconduct and is not recommended for retention.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4351 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given the seriousness of your misconduct that resulted in two NUPs, a ‘civil conviction and that you were no longer qualified for submarine service... The Board believed you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since Sailors who are...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00148-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 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...