Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03346-09
Original file (03346-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

Docket No: 03346-09
3 March 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 2 March 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

17 April 2000 at age 21. On 16 September 2004, you were
honorably released from active duty and transferred to the Navy
Reserve with a reserve obligation until 23 March 2008. On

24 June 2005, administrative discharge action was initiated to
separate you from the Navy Reserve due to your non-participation
in drills. The letter of notification was mailed to you (return
receipt requested) and on 5 July 2005, the separation authority
directed that you receive a general discharge. You were so
discharged the same day. At that time, you were not recommended
for reenlistment and 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 prior
honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your reenlistment
code due to your failure to drill with your reserve unit. In
this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized when an
individual is discharged and not recommended for reenlistment.
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.

Sincerely,

\WQend

W. DEAN PFEIFF
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02565-10

    Original file (02565-10.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. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible upgrade. 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 04675-09

    Original file (04675-09.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 February 2010. 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. 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 | 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 | CY2012 | 00726 12

    Original file (00726 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 24 October 2012. If another branch of service decides to waive your reenlistment code and accept you for enlistment, the Navy will not object. 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 | 09231-09

    Original file (09231-09.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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to change your RE-4 reenlistment code. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00590-10

    Original file (00590-10.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. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible upgrade. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exjystence of probable material error or injustice.