Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02721-08
Original file (02721-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX TRG

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 2721-08
5 March 2009

 

 

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 3 March 2009. 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.

You enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 22 October 2006 with prior
honorable service in the Navy and a short period of service in
the Army. In early 2007 you were processed for an administrative
separation due to unsatisfactory participation in the Navy
Reserve. On 9 April 2007 the separation authority approved the
recommendation of your commanding officer and directed a general
discharge and the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. The
general discharge was issued that same day.

In your application, you state that you had various problems with
your automobiles and had to share rides or hitchhike to reserve
meetings. On some occasions you could not get to the reserve
center which ultimately resulted in your discharge for
unsatisfactory participation. You believe, in effect, that these
mitigating factors and your desire for further service warrants a
correction to your record to allow return to the Navy Reserve.

Although your record is incomplete, it is clear that you would
have been notified of separation processing and given an
Opportunity to present your side of the story before the
recommendation for separation was sent to the discharge
authority. Further, the Board believed that if you had properly
informed the command of your difficulties they may have approved
transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve until your problems were
resolved. Since you missed drills and apparently did not contest
the separation proceedings, the Board concluded that you were
properly discharged due to unsatisfactory participation. Since
an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is
discharged due to unsatisfactory participation, the Board further

concluded that the RE-4 was properly assigned and a correction to
that code is not warranted.

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,

lo

W. DEAN P ER
Executive Direst

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00820-09

    Original file (00820-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR2133 14

    Original file (NR2133 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 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 | CY2008 | 06872-08

    Original file (06872-08.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. On 28 February 2008 you were sent a notification of separation processing due to unsatisfactory participation by registered mail. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05445-10

    Original file (05445-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 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. The ADB found that you had unsatisfactory participation and recommended a general discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08043-08

    Original file (08043-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 dune 2009. This action certainly suggests that there was a basis for the separation processing. 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 | 00326-10

    Original file (00326-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may have it reviewed by the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). 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 | CY2008 | 02573-08

    Original file (02573-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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. 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 | CY2001 | 01038-01

    Original file (01038-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    in-charge (OINC) recommended to the discharge authority that you be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation. of your scheduled active duty for training and had sufficient time to make arrangements for child care, but you did not make the unit aware of problems until after your missed a drill and the period of active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01609-10

    Original file (01609-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 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. At that time the discharge authority stated that you were not recommended for reenlistment because of your failure to maintain at least an 85%...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06008-08

    Original file (06008-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support - thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, it is clear from the record that you had no participation in the Navy Reserve for nearly a year and that you did not respond to the...