Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9807519
Original file (NC9807519.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TRG
Docket No: 7519-98
14 July 1999

 

Dear 

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02987-02

    Original file (02987-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. marks assigned for the period 1 February 1992 to 25 July 1992 are not entered on the page 9. In addition, the page 9 clearly shows that you were not eligible for reenlistment on 25 July 1992. that your performance either...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07768-98

    Original file (07768-98.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 May 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 14 March 1988. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08298-01

    Original file (08298-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. reporting to this command member has had 2 larceny convictions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07478-01

    Original file (07478-01.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. Both the forfeitures and reduction were A 25 March 1992 Court However, the On the A page 9 entry shows that you were assigned adverse marks of 2.6 in military bearing and personal behavior for the reporting period 1 February to 16 October 1992, and you were not recommended for reenlistment. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04708-01

    Original file (04708-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 12 December 2001. 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. failure to pay a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03796-02

    Original file (03796-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. A review In this military bearing/character, and Your record further reflects that you received an adverse special enlisted performance evaluation for the period of 16 June to 12 November 2001 to document the removal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09405-02

    Original file (09405-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2003. On dated 27 November 1992, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were honorably discharged and were assigned an RE-4 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 | CY2002 | 06057-00

    Original file (06057-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. The report stated that you were not -- On 22 April 1992 you were convicted by special court-martial of use of marijuana in February apparently based on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05569-01

    Original file (05569-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time you were assigned an RR-4 You state in your application that since discharge you have attended weight management and nutrition courses and are now within weight standards. Finally, the Board noted the adverse marks in two categories in the last performance evaluation and The Board that you were not recommended for advancement. believed that despite the excellent comments concerning your performance of duty, the adverse marks and comments meant that a recommendation for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06940-01

    Original file (06940-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board found that the last performance evaluationdocumenting your FAP failures was sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code without consideration of previous evaluations and concluded that the...