Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08879-09
Original file (08879-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SIN
Docket No: 08879-09
29 April 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 23 April 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.

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 oF
injustice.

The Board found you began a period of active in the Navy on

6 Apirl 2004. The Board noted that the record reflects that you
were the subject of three nonjudicial punishment 's for offenses
that included periods of unauthorized absence and disobedience.
You were honorably released from active duty on 5 July 2008 at
the expiration of your enlistment and not recommended for
retention based on your pattern of misconduct and poor judgment .
At that time, you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of
service and the reason you were not permitted to reenlist.
Nevertheless, the Board conciuded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code. In this
regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when 4 Sailor is
geparated at the expiration of his term of active obligated
service and is not recommended for retention. Accordingly, your
application has been-denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.

a
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,

> ees

F
Executive Directo

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08642-09

    Original file (08642-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2010. fn this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is reguired when a Sailor is separated at the expiration of their term of active obligated service and is not recommended for 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 injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02456-09

    Original file (02456-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful an@ conscientious consideration of the 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 a change in the reenlistment code given your adverse discharge evaluation which recommended that you not be allowed to reenlist. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06371-09

    Original file (06371-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07704-10

    Original file (07704-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is discharged at the completion of his term of active obligated service and is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13330-09

    Original file (13330-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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 | 04381-09

    Original file (04381-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 April 2005. Further, you were warned that further deficiencies in your performance oF conduct could result in administrative discharged action. 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 | 04036-09

    Original file (04036-09.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. As a result, on 21 June 2007, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were honorably discharged by reason of nonretention on active duty and were assigned an RE-3M reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12792-09

    Original file (12792-09.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 | CY2009 | 10545-09

    Original file (10545-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2010. On 29 April 1991, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-6 and were not recommended for reenlistment due to your refusal to obligate for the orders you received. 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 | 04508-09

    Original file (04508-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...