Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02996-09
Original file (02996-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
- 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC

Docket No: 02996-09
20 January 2010

 

 

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 20 January 2010. 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

9 July 2004, at age 19. You served honorably and were released
from active duty on 20 October 2004. On 10 January 2005, you
began a period in the Navy Reserve until you were separated by
reason of unsatisfactory participation, as you failed to attend
in 24 drills. At that time, you received a general discharge and
were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason
or characterization of your discharge, or your reenlistment code,
given your record of failing to participate in the required
drills. The Board concluded that you were fortunate to have
received a general discharge, because many service members
receive: discharges under other than honorable conditions for
misconduct such as yours. 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.
Consequentiy, 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 | 02736-09

    Original file (02736-09.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 January 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 | 04750-09

    Original file (04750-09.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. On 6 April 1989, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of failure to participate. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason or characterization of your discharge, or your reenlistment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03346-09

    Original file (03346-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2010. On 24 June 2005, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you from the Navy Reserve due to your non-participation in drills. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized when an individual is discharged and not recommended for reenlistment.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10335-09

    Original file (10335-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on Accordingly, your application has been votes of the members of the panel will It is regretted that the circumstances favorable action cannot be taken. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05445-10

    Original file (05445-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 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. The ADB found that you had unsatisfactory participation and recommended a general discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10321-09

    Original file (10321-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2010. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances. 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 | 04284-09

    Original file (04284-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 2010. Based on your non-participation in drills, administrative discharge action was initiated and on 31 May 1991, the separation authority directed an other than honorable discharge. 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 | 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 | 10818-09

    Original file (10818-09.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 July 2010. At the time of your discharge, an RE-4 reenlistment code was assigned. 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 | 03338-09

    Original file (03338-09.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. 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...