Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10335-09
Original file (10335-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5700

 

Son
Docket No: 10335-09
3 August 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 27 July 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 or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 25
March 2003. ‘The Board found that your record reflects you served
until 24 March 2008, when you were honorably released from active
duty, after five years of service, and transferred to the Navy
Reserve. Additionally, you had a reserve obligation until 29
September 2010. On 25 September 2008, it was determined that you
failed to maintain a satisfactory drilling status by accumulating
approximately 16 unexcused absences. Subsequently, you received
a general discharge due to your non-participation 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 RE-4 reenlistment code.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant such a change of your reenlistment code
given your failure to maintain a satisfactory drill record with
your reserve unit. In this regard, you were assigned the

appropriate reenlistment code based on
Accordingly, your application has been
votes of the members of the panel will

It is regretted that the circumstances
favorable action cannot be taken. You

your circumstances.
denied. The names and
be furnished upon request.

of your case are such that
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 | 10321-09

    Original file (10321-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2010. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances. 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 | 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 | 09231-09

    Original file (09231-09.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. 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 RE-4 reenlistment code. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances.

  • 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 | CY2011 | 01383-11

    Original file (01383-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 April 2011. In thie regard, you were assigned the appropriate reentry code based on your circumstances. 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 | 04750-09

    Original file (04750-09.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. On 6 April 1989, the discharge authority directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of failure to participate. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the reason or characterization of your discharge, or your reenlistment...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03346-09

    Original file (03346-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 2010. On 24 June 2005, administrative discharge action was initiated to separate you from the Navy Reserve due to your non-participation in drills. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized when an individual is discharged and not recommended for reenlistment.

  • 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 | CY2002 | 03831-01

    Original file (03831-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board found you enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 9 February 1984 at the age of 18. concluded these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge or a change of your narrative reason for separation or reenlistment code because of your drug related misconduct and your failure to maintain a satisfactory drilling status. your case, the Board concluded your discharge, narrative reason for separation, and reenlistment code were proper as...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01575-09

    Original file (01575-09.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 March 2009. 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...