DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SJN
Docket No: 00488-12
22 October 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 17 October 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 imsuEELeLvent
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
21 July 1988. The Board found that during the period from
22 March 1989 to 30 January 1991, you received four nonjudicial
punishments (NJP’s) for disobedience, three instances of
unauthorized absence (UA), failing to go to your appointed place
of duty, two instances of dereliction of duty, making a false
official statement, and damaging government property.
Additionally, you were counseled and warned on more than one
occasion that further misconduct could result in administrative
discharge action. Subsequently, administrative discharge action
was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a
serious offense. You elected to consult counsel and have your
case heard before an administrative discharge board (ADB). On
20 March 1991, you received a fifth NUP for failing to go to your
appointed place of duty. Om 22 April 1991, the ADB recommended
separation with a general discharge by reason of misconduct due
to commission of a serious offense. On 26 April 1991, your
commanding officer concurred with the ADB’s findings, but
forwarded his recommendation that you be discharged with an other
than honorable (OTH) discharge. On 17 May 1991, the separation
authority directed a general discharge by reason of misconduct
due to commission of a serious offense. On 30 May 1991 you were
so discharged. At that time, you were assigned an RE-4 reentry
code and not recommended for reenlistment.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, record of
service, post service accomplishments and character letters.
Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or
changing your reentry code given your five NJUP’s for serious
offenses. An RE-4 reentry code must be assigned to all Sailors
discharged due to misconduct. Finally, the Board noted that you
were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a discharge
under OTH conditions is often directed when an individual is
discharged for misconduct. 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,
Tp DY. ZS. _
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
fy a
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00110-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 06210-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 March 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 | CY2011 | 01068-11
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 misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03471-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. 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 | 03868-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 February 2013. 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 | CY2008 | 08719-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. 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 | CY2012 | 00477 12
On 4 May 1990, you were UA for three days, with no disciplinary action taken. On 5 September and 1 October 1990, you were UA one day each, and no disciplinary action was taken against you. On 8 July 1991, you were UA again for one day and no disciplinary action was taken.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03117-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. Biter careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00913-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 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. 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 | 08884-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 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...