DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DOG 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 04068-09
3 March 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 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
16 July 1987 at age 18. Based on the information currently
contained in your record, on 18 August 1987, you were counseled
with regard to unsatisfactory personal hygiene and appearance.
You were warned that further deficiencies or misconduct could
result in administrative discharge action. Subsequently, it
appears you were involuntarily processed for an entry level
separation due to unsatisfactory performance and/or conduct. In
connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the
separation action and the discharge authority would have approved
a recommendation for separation. The record clearly shows that
on 25 September 1987, you were discharged with an entry level
separation. At that time you were assigned and RE-4 reenlistment
code.
Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code to individuals who are separated due to entry
level performance and conduct. The Board thus concluded that
there is no error or injustice in your reenlistment code.
Further, the Board employed a presumption of regularity
pertaining to your discharge. This means that, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, your discharge will be presumed to be
proper as issued. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00865-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. Your record is incomplete, but in connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07677-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 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 | CY2014 | NR6989 14_Redacted
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. Further, you stated to your superiors your desire to go home and that you would continue to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11433-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2011. You were notified of the recommendation that you be discharged with an uncharacterized separation due to entry level performance and conduct. 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 | 10480-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 06479-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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 | CY2011 | 01355-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ‘application on 2 November 2011. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04098-02
On 21 September 1987 a recruit aptitude board recommended an administrative separation. At that time you stated After review the separation "I do not and you were so separated on 1 October You state in your application that you are being denied employment as a Federal prison guard because of the RR-4 reenlistment code. 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 | CY2014 | NR4276 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2015. After being afforded all of your procedural rights, you received an entry level separation due to erroneous enlistment on 24 February 1987. 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 | CY2010 | 11919-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2011. On 22 October 1987, administrative discharge action wag initiated to separate you by reason of fraudulent entry. 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.