Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 10380 12
Original file (10380 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

SIN
Docket No: 10380-12
3 December 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 29 November 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.

On 11 August 1990, you reenlisted in the Marine Corps after
serving over seven years of honorable service. The Board found
that you were convicted by two summary courts-martial (SCM) of
assault, disobedience, disrespect, and two specifications of
communicating a threat. Additionally, you were convicted by
civil authorities of making communications in an
annoying/alarming manner. Subsequently, administrative discharge
action was initiated to separate you by reason of misconduct due
to commission of a serious offense. You waived your procedural
ring to an administrative discharge board (ADB). Your commanding
officer forwarded your case recommending separation. On 5 July
2001, you received an other than honorable discharge. 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 prior honorable
service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were
not sufficient to warrant changing your reentry code given your
two SCM’s for serious offenses and conviction by civil
authorities. The Board noted that you waived your right to an
ADB, your best chance for retention or a better characterization
of service. 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 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,

BRIAN J. GEORGE
Head, Discharge Section

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4351 13

    Original file (NR4351 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 01067 12

    Original file (01067 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2012 | 00477 12

    Original file (00477 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 02196-11

    Original file (02196-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your discharge due to your misconduct that resulted in civil charges involving drugs, NUP, and two SCM convictions for serious offenses. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01145 12

    Original file (01145 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of three NJP’s, two convictions by SPCM’s, and by two SCM’s of serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00110-12

    Original file (00110-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 05119-10

    Original file (05119-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC Docket No: 05119-10 10 February 2011 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 9 February 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11372-10

    Original file (11372-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 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. On 13 April 2005, your case was forwarded and the discharge authority concurred with the ADB’s finding and recommendation, and directed that you be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 03674-11

    Original file (03674-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘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. Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8265 13

    Original file (NR8265 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...