DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BAN
Docket No: 05857-08
30 March 2009
eee" D
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 6 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy on 31 August 2000, and served without
disciplinary incident. However, you received multiple counseling
statements regarding your disrespect toward your chain of
command, poor self control and performance, unprofessional
displays of outburst, unwillingness to foster teamwork, good
order and discipline and disruptiveness. Therefore, on 29 June
2007, you had completed your enlisted obligated service, were not
recommended for retention by your commanding officer, and were
separated with an honorable discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment
code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change to your reenlistment code due
your substandard performance. 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,
x ,
W. DEAN PFEL
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08707-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2009. On 6 June 1990, you received an adverse performance evaluation, and were counseled regarding UA and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative - separation. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment code due to your repeated misconduct and substandard performance.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05407-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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 | CY2008 | 08722-08
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. On 23 July 1993, you were honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve and were recommended for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08762-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07014-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. You reenlisted in the Navy on 22 March 2001 after six years of honorable service. 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 | 11592-08
A three-member “panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2°’ September 2009. 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. On 19 May 1987, you were notified of administrative separation processing for entry level performance/conduct as evidenced by your failure to adapt...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00590-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2010. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible upgrade. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exjystence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10761-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your , application on 20 August 2009. 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. On 1 September 1972 and 1 March 1973, _ you received an adverse mark in military behavior.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07409-10
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. You were counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further offenses could result in administrative separation. 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 | CY2008 | 02282-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2009. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant vecharacterization of your discharge or changing your reenlistment code given your two NJP’s and conviction by GCM for very serious offenses. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...