Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09208-08
Original file (09208-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 . coN

Docket No: 09208-08
7 August 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 4 August 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 and began a period of active duty on

29 September 1999 at age 21. You served for over three years
without incident until 15 February 2003, when you received
nonjudicial punishment (NIP) for assault and disobedience. On
28 September 2003 you were honorably released from active duty
and transferred to the Navy Reserve at the expiration of your
enlistment. At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment

code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your entire period of
service and the fact you were not permitted to reenlist.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code. In this
regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual
igs separated at the expiration of his term of active obligated
service and is not recommended for retention. With regard to
your participation in “Operation Enduring and Iraqi Freedom”,
there is no evidence in the record to support it, and you
‘submitted no such evidence. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes o£ 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,

\aQour

W. DEAN P FE
RBxecutive rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00356-09

    Original file (00356-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 7 After careful and conscientious congideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 13 June 2003, you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00714-09

    Original file (00714-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2009. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant any change in your RE-4 reenlistment code, given your record of two NUP’s for misconduct. 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 | 01173-09

    Original file (01173-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ; application on 1 December 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, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated at the expiration of his term of active obligated service...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 01295-09

    Original file (01295-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 December 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 | CY1999 | 08313-09

    Original file (08313-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08313-09

    Original file (08313-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11191-08

    Original file (11191-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 14 October 2009. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is released at the expiration of his term of active obligated service and is not recommended for retention. 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 | 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03183-07

    Original file (03183-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 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. On 24 January 2003, the Department of the Navy, Central Adjudication Facility (DON CAF) informed you via your commanding officer (CO), of their...