Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07845-02
Original file (07845-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 FC
Docket No: 07845-02
3 March 2003



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 12 February 2003. 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 20 October 1977 at age 20, and immediately began a 24-month period of active duty. You served without incident and were released from active duty on 27 September 1980. On 11 January 1983, you reenlisted in the Training and Administration of Reserves (TAR) Program and were discharged on 7 January 1987 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.
On 8 January 1987, you reenlisted and served without incident until 20 April 1988 when you were awarded nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of cocaine. The punishment imposed was reduction in rate to paygrade E-4, forfeitures of pay, and extra duty.
Your record shows that you served without further incident until 27 August 1989, at which time you were honorably discharged at the expiration of your term of enlistment. At that time, you were issued an RE-4 reenlistment code due to your active service exceeding the high year tenure (HYT) limitations established for individuals serving in paygrade E-4.
Regulations in effect at the time of your discharge provided that the HYT limit for individuals serving in pay grade E-4 was 10 years of active naval service. Reenlistment beyond the HYT limit of 10 years was not authorized and assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code was required. Further, you signed a page 13 service record entry on 24 July 1989 acknowledging that you were being assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4 and that you were not eligible to reenlist. Since you were treated no differently than others discharged under similar circumstances, the Board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code. 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,


W.       DEAN PFEIFFER
 Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08177-01

    Original file (08177-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You then reenlisted for six years on 9 March The record reflects that you were advanced to TM2 (E-5) on 16 January 1980 and served without incident until 6 May 1982 when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05106-02

    Original file (05106-02.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 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Bpard consisted Board. Reenlistment beyond the HYT limit of 10 years was not authorized and assignment of an RE-6 reenlistment code was required. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06543-02

    Original file (06543-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted Your allegations of error and considered your 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.. th‘at you enlisted in the Navy on 26 July 1985 at During the period 28 January 1987 through 20 July 1988, The Board found age 20. you were awarded four offenses. paygrade E-2 because The Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00968-01

    Original file (00968-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAb’AL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 ELP Docket No. 968-01 14 June 2001 This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. provisio,ns of Title 10, United A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00825-01

    Original file (00825-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 June 2001. 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 | CY2008 | 09424-08

    Original file (09424-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2009. 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, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04736-11

    Original file (04736-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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 | CY2002 | 06113-02

    Original file (06113-02.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 February 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04503-07

    Original file (04503-07.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 February 2008. You were also in a UA status during the period from 1 to 5 September 1989. 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 | CY2009 | 01742-09

    Original file (01742-09.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 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...