DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 6496-09
2 June 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 1 June 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.
Bfter 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 on 28 June 1999 at age 19. You served
without disciplinary incident until 31 May 2002, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your
appointed place of duty and failure to obey a lawful order.
Your record contains a performance evaluation dated 22 January
2003 which states, in part, that your behavior had been
detrimental to your work center and as such you were not
recommended for advancement, retention, or reenlistment.
On 4 May 2003, upon completion of your required active service,
you were honorably released from active duty. At that time you
were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
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 reenlistment code.
Nevertheless, the Boar concluded these factors were not
of the seriousness of your misconduct.
concluded that your misconduct and nonrecommendation for
reenlistment were sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4
reenlistment code, which is authorized
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The Board suggested that you may wish to apply for a waiver of
your RE-4 reenlistment code with branches of the armed forces
other than the Navy.
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,
\p Wend
W. DEAN PF
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04508-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction cf Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 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 | 04001-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01533-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 2010. As such, on 7 October 1994, you were issued a general discharge by reason of misconduct and were assigned an RE-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 | CY1999 | 08313-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2009 | 08313-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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 | CY2009 | 06699-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2010. 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 error...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01601-10
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 you were not recommended for further retention or reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 23 October 2006 you were honorably discharged at the expiration of your enlistment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11143-09
However, the Board concluded that your reenlistment code should not be changed, your pay grade of E-4 should not be reinstated, nor should your security clearance revocation documentation be removed because of your substandard performance and misconduct. The Board concluded that you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service, because Sailors who are separated for misconduct normally receive an other than honorable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10284-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 July 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 Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01736-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . Documentary ; material considered by thé 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 material error or injustice.