Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09194-09
Original file (09194-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 9194-09
20 January 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.

BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 13 January 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 ali 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 enlisted in the Navy on 26 July 2002.
‘On 2 June 2005 you received nonjudicial punishment for an
unauthorized absence, failure to go to appointed place of duty,
absence from appointed place of duty, wiliful disobedience, and
dereliction of duty. In your final enlisted evaluation report
dated 15 July 2006, you were not recommended for retention by
your commanding officer. You were honorably released from active
duty on 25 July 2006, and assigned a reentry code of RE-4.

Applicable regulations normally require the assignment of an RE-4
reentry code to individuals who are not recommended for retention
in the last evaluation report issued prior to their separation.
As you have not demonstrated that your reentry code is erroneous
or unjust, the Board concluded that there is no basis for
changing it, and denied your application. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04238-09

    Original file (04238-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2014 | NR0265 14

    Original file (NR0265 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 July 2014. On 30 January 2009, you received NUP for failure to obey an order/regulation by operating a government vehicle while exceeding the speed limit. 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 | CY2013 | NR3108 13

    Original file (NR3108 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2014. It was also noted on that evaluation that you had received three NJP’s and were 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 | CY2010 | 06134-10

    Original file (06134-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. 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 | 02275-09

    Original file (02275-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 contains an enlisted performance evaluation for the period from 16 March 2006 to 15 Mareh 2007 in which you received an overall trait...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07006-09

    Original file (07006-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your record of four NJP’s for misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09553-09

    Original file (09553-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. You were not recommended for retention or reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09131-09

    Original file (09131-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 concluded that those factors were insufficient to warrant a change in the reason for discharge, given your disciplinary record, Applicable regulations normally require the assignment of an RE-4 reentry code to individuals who are not recommended for reenlistment. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR4929 14

    Original file (NR4929 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 5 May 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. In this regard, an RE-3C reentry code is authorized when a Marine is released from active duty, and is not recommended for reenlistment.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07580-10

    Original file (07580-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 probable...