Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08627-08
Original file (08627-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
/

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BAN
Docket No: 08627-08
31 July 2009

 

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 8 July 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 14 June 2002, and were separated on
27 November 2002, at the convenience of the government for
failure to adapt to the military lifestyle. You received an
entry level separation (ELS) characterization, and an RE-4
reenlistment code due to your entry level performance or conduct.

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 this factor was
not sufficient to warrant a change to your reenlistment code due
your failure to adapt to the military lifestyle. 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.

I. ¢

In ‘DEAN P
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01476-02

    Original file (01476-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You On 24 January 2001 your commanding officer forwarded the separation action, to the discharge authority. supported the RE-4 reenlistment code due to your failure to adapt to the Marine Corps.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09454-08

    Original file (09454-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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. The separation authority directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of performance and conduct and on 5 June 1992 you were so...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06867-01

    Original file (06867-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 12 March 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. together with all material submitted in support and applicable statutes, regulations, Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Your allegations of error and your naval record, considered your After careful and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07826-08

    Original file (07826-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2009. 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. 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 | CY2007 | 03601-07

    Original file (03601-07.rtf) 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.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 13 July 2005 at age 18. In this regard, the discharge authority directed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07705-07

    Original file (07705-07.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. At this time you were not recommended for retention or reenlistment, and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of your failure to complete basic training due to your lack...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02697-07

    Original file (02697-07.rtf) 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.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 3 July 1986 at age 20. As a result, you were administratively processed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03130-02

    Original file (03130-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. At that time you were not recommended for reenlistment 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2751 14

    Original file (NR2751 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 April 2014. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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

    Original file (11592-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member “panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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...