Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02736-09
Original file (02736-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
: @ NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TUR . _
Docket No: 2736-09
14 January 2010

 

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 12 January 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 Naval Reserve on 4 December 2001,

immediately began a period of active duty, and served without
Gisciplinary incident. Subsequently, you were released from
active duty and returned to the Naval Reserve in a ready reserve
Status. Your record reflects that during the period from 22 June
2002 to 26 April 2004 you had completed a total of 20 drills, and
as such were an unsatisfactory participant.

It appears that you were subsequently processed for an
administrative separation by reason of the convenience of the
government due to unsatisfactory participation as evidenced by
your failure to attend drill. The discharge authority directed
your discharge by reason of the convenience of the government due
to your inability to maintain satisfactory drill attendance. As
a result of this action, you were not recommended for retention
or reenlistment, and on 26 April 2004 you were issued a general
under honorable conditions discharge certificate.

' The Board, in its review of your record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to reenlist, proof of childbirth, and the
documentation provided in support of your request. It also
considered your assertions that your discharge was due to
childbirth and/or lack of child care, and that there is no reason
for your nonrecommendation for reenlistment. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a
change of your reenlistment status, specifically, your
nonrecommendation for reenlistment due to your failure to
satisfactorily attend scheduled drills. In the absence of any
evidence that your nonrecommendation for reenlistment was in
error, the Board assumed that sufficient evidence existed to
support the discharge authority's decision. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.

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,

VW ead

W. DEAN P
Executive D r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08541-09

    Original file (08541-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. 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 | 13164-09

    Original file (13164-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08312-09

    Original file (08312-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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. 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2011 | 04736-11

    Original file (04736-11.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 February 2012. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04269-12

    Original file (04269-12.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 March 2013. 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. ' Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR336 14

    Original file (NR336 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    after careful and conscientious consideration of che entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to satisfactorily participate in the Marine Corps Reserve and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02633-10

    Original file (02633-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2011. On 9 March 2007 your commanding officer recommended an administrative separation by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve due to failure to maintain medical readiness as evidenced by noncompliance with TNPQ status update requirements. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...