DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 6026-09
12 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 11 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you had prior
honorable service in the Navy Reserve from 1987 until 1990.
You reenlisted on 27 June 1990. You received nonjudicial
punishment for five specifications of writing insufficient fund
checks. You received two adverse performance evaluations and
were counseled on three occasions for being late to work,
financial irresponsibility, and failure to meet body fat
requirements. On 26 February 1994, you received an honorable
discharge at the completion of your required active duty, and
were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 12 May 1994, you
were released from the Navy Reserve and were not recommended
for reenlistment.
The Board, in its review of your entire record, carefully
weighed all potential mitigation, such as your youth and prior
honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that
these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing your
reenlistment code because of your misconduct and substandard
performance. In view of the above, 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,
\aXons
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di¥ector
+
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01173-09
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 | CY2009 | 04238-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2010. On 10 May 1988, you received NIP for UA from you appointed place of duty. 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 | CY2008 | 12233-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 November 2009. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06704-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 2011. Your record contains an adverse performance evaluation for the period from 8 June 1993 to 30 June 1994 which reflects, in part, that you were not recommended for advancement or 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 | CY2001 | 01411-00
doctor placed you in a temporary status of not physically qualified from status after that date. concluded that your medical history was sufficient to support a decision that you should not be reenlisted in the Naval Reserve. 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 | 11042-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2008. 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 applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08722-08
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 23 July 1993, you were honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve and were recommended for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5884 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2014. On 19 November 1991, you received the honorable discharge by reason of your diagnosed personality disorder and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) 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 | CY2001 | 01840-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 2001. accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, considered your application on regulations and policies. only one...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04070-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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...