DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BUG
Docket No: 627-13
9 October 2013
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 2013. 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. In addition, the Board considered the
report of the Naval Discharge Review Board, dated 25 April 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and entered active duty on 26 July
1978. You received nonjudicial punishment on nine occasions and
were convicted by civil authorities. Your offenses included
breach of the peace, unauthorized absence (nine periods totaling
six days), absence from your appointed place of duty (11
instances), failure to obey a lawful order, assault, making a
false official statement, and wrongful possession of nine grams
of cannabis resin and a controlled substance. You were then
notified that you were being administratively separated with an
other than honorable (OTH) characterization of service due to
misconduct. You waived your procedural right to an
administrative discharge board (ADB). On 27 February 1980, you
received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to
misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
reenlistment) reentry code.
In its review of your application, the Board considered all
mitigating factors, such as your youth and current desire to
upgrade your discharge to receive veterans’ benefits. However,
the Board concluded that no upgrade was warranted due to your
numerous acts of misconduct. The Board found that you waived
your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for retention or a
better characterization of service. You are advised that no
discharge is automatically upgraded due solely to the passage of
time or post service good conduct. In view of the above, 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,
W. DEAN Pb
Executive or
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 03190-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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 | CY2012 | 05740-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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 | CY2012 | 04888 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 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. On 17 July 1986, you began a period of UA that at lasted nine days, ending on 10 August 1986.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR626 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2013. On 28 July 1989, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. 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 | CY2010 | 11722-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 August 2011. On 6 September 1991, you received an OTH conditions characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code. 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 | CY2010 | 01760-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2447 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2014. You exercised your procedural right to have your case considered by an administrative discharge board (ADB). 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 | CY2013 | NR5886 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2014. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR637 13
You waived your procedural right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). However, the Board concluded that your reentry code should not be changed due to your misconduct and non-recommendation for reenlistment. 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 | CY2010 | 06800-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 2011. However, the Board concluded that your discharge should not be changed due to your numerous acts of 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.