DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 5S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
SIN
Docket No: 05278-12
19 July 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 July 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 and began a period of active duty on
18 May 2004. The Board found that Quring the period from
5 November 2004 to 6 February 2006, you received seven
counseling’s and warnings regarding your performance and
responsibilities. On 21 June 2006, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for 17 days of unauthorized absence (UA). You
received restriction, extra duty, and a reduction in payorade.
Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by
reason of misconduct due to minor disciplinary infractions. You
waived your rights to consult counsel, submit a statement or have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your
case was forwarded with the recommendation that you receive a
general characterization of service due to misconduct, and you
were so discharged on 28 June 2006. 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 record of
service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given the
fact that you were counseled and warned on more than one occasion
of the consequences of further misconduct. Finally, an RE-4
reentry code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due to
misconduct. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the members of the panel wili 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,,
\D Baws
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Diweetor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05793-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. You were warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 09464 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given your record of three NJP’s, conviction by SCM, and the fact that you were counseled and warned of the consequences of further misconduct after your third NUP. The Board did not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04853-10
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. Additionally, you _were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative discharge action. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07949-10
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 6 June 2006, your recommendation for advancement was withdrawn due to substandard performance.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00488 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 30 May 1991 you were so discharged.
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 | 01110 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 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 | CY2014 | NR0679 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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 | 01067 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. Your case was forwarded recommending that you be discharged under other than honorable (OTH) conditions by reason of misconduct. The Board did not consider whether to upgrade your discharge or change the reason for separation because you did not request such action, and you have not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03669-11
_A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your > application on 31 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...