Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09177-08
Original file (09177-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
._DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5700

 

CRS
Docket No: 9177-08
23 October 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 15 October 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 ali material submitted in support

thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations.
and policies.

After careful and conscientious considération 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 Navy on 7 January 2003.
On 20 July 2005 you received nonjudicial punishment for
possession of illegal drugs. You were honorably released from
active duty on 6 January 2007 and transferred to the Navy

Reserve. You were assigned a reentry code of RE-4 to indicate
that you were not eligible for reenlistment.

A Sailor must be recommended for advancement and retention in his .
last two graded evaluations in order to be eligible for
reenlistment. Since you were not recommended for advancement or
retention in your next to last graded evaluation which covers the
21 July 2005 to 15 July 2006 period, you were not eligible for
reenlistment. As you have not demonstrated that your reentry
code is erroneous or unjust, the Board concluded that there is no
basis for changing it, and denied your application. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07633-09

    Original file (07633-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 30 September 2009. You were assigned a reentry code of RE-4 to indicate that you were not eligible for reenlistment. 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 | CY2005 | 01516-05

    Original file (01516-05.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 27 June 2000 at age 21. In the last enlisted performance evaluation of 26...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 11272 11

    Original file (11272 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    g. In March 2011, after being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. He had never been held back in any way from progressing through his Navy career due to security clearance issues and he was not aware that there was a deficiency that would disqualify him from competing for advancement. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03444-08

    Original file (03444-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 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 | 05850-01

    Original file (05850-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A You were marked 3.0 ("meets The reporting senior noted The evaluation for the period ending 15 July 2000 showed you were now promotable and meeting standards in all categories. discharged from your second enlistment, you had not advanced Therefore, you met the criteria for reenlistment when For the first reenlistment, an However, at the time you were 2 Since you The Board found beyond E-3 and were not recommended for advancement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • 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 | CY2008 | 03731-08

    Original file (03731-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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 | CY2004 | 07915-04

    Original file (07915-04.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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 22 July 1998 and then served without incident for almost six years. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5643 13

    Original file (NR5643 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 | 07014-08

    Original file (07014-08.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 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.