Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08312-09
Original file (08312-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51900 .

 

TOR
Docket No: 8312-09
26 August 2009

 

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 25 August 2009. 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.

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 Naval Reserve on 31 January 2002,
immediately began a period of active duty, and served without
disciplinary incident. Subsequently, you were released from
active duty and transferred to the Naval Reserve for inactive
duty training (IDT).

It appears that in September 2005 you were processed for an
administrative separation due to unsatisfactory participation as
‘a result of your failure to respond to a previously mailed
discharge notification. The discharge authority directed your
discharge by reason of the convenience of the government due to
your inability to maintain satisfactory drill attendance. As a
result of this action, you were not recommended for retention or
reenlistment. On 1 October 2005 you were so discharged.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your assertion that
you were told not to report for drills because you did not meet
the swimming qualifications. It also considered your desire to
reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change of your reenlistment status,
specifically, your nonrecommendation for reenlistment due to your
failure to satisfactorily attend scheduled drills. In the
absence of any evidence that your nonrecommendation for
reenlistment was in error, the Board assumed that sufficient
evidence existed to support the discharge authority's decision.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.

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,

W. DEAN PPETRF

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08541-09

    Original file (08541-09.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 August 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. 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 08043-08

    Original file (08043-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 dune 2009. This action certainly suggests that there was a basis for the separation processing. 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 | 04125-12

    Original file (04125-12.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. Prior to your entry into the Navy Reserve, you signed an enlistment contract in which you were advised that you “must” perform at least 85 percent of your assigned drills, specifically, 48 drills and 12 days of active duty for training. Finally, the Board concluded that sufficient evidence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00820-09

    Original file (00820-09.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 May 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. 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 | NR336 14

    Original file (NR336 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    after careful and conscientious consideration of che entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to satisfactorily participate in the Marine Corps Reserve and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5313 14

    Original file (NR5313 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2015. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to satisfactorily...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01678-06

    Original file (01678-06.rtf) 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, th Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 9 May 1996 at age 17 and then earned three consecutive...