DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION GF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SION
Decket No: 09577-09
4 November 2009
This ig 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 3 November 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 the. evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You reenlisted in the Navy on 1 November 1995 after three years
of prior honorable service. Based on the information currently
contained in your record, on 7 July 1997, you signed an
Administrative Remarks (NAVPERS 1070/6133) entry stating, in part,
that you were fully advised and counseled that your refusal to
incur required obligated service would result in the assignment
of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Subsequently, you were not
recommended for retention and honorably discharged on 31 October.
1999, At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weaghed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorabie
service, overall record of your last period of service, the
reasons you stated that led to your discharge, and post service
accomplishments. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors
were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code
given the fact that you were counseled and warned that your
refusal to obligate for further service would result in an
RE-4 reenlistment code. Accordingly, your application has been
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will he
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,
\ ook
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07991-09
“A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of. 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. Additionally, under the circumstances of your case, the code is required since you refused to obligate for further service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10717-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 15 January 2002 you were honorably discharged by reason of expiration of enlistment and assigned an RE-30 reenlistment code, as directed by CMC. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10545-09
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 | CY2014 | NR0642 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 May 2014. 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 | CY2009 | 01295-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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. 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 | 03377-09
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 honorably discharged from active duty and at that time you 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 | CY2007 | 11208-07
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 Navy on 24 April 1982 at age 18 and began a period of active duty on 27 April 1982...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0704 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2014. 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 | CY1998 | 07734-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 April 1999. 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. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code given your refusal to reenlist.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03731-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 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...