Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11080-09
Original file (11080-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 11080-09
21 July 2010

 

Dear sangamininiiiadiioae

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 20 July 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 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that you entered active
duty in the Navy on 11 July 1977 and were honorably released
10 July 1981. On 13 June 1983, you were honorably discharged
from the Navy Reserve and were recommended for reenlistment.
On 14 June 1983, you reenlisted in the Navy Reserve for six
years. On 25 August 1983, you were placed on probation due to
unsatisfactory drill participation. You were warned that
further unexcused absences would result in immediate
termination and that you would not be recommended for further
affiliation with the Navy Reserve. On 1 November 1985, you
were transferred to the Navy Reserve Personnel Center,
terminated from drilling Ready Reserve status due to
unsatisfactory participation, and not recommended for
reaffiliation. On 13 June 1989, you were honorably discharged
from the Navy Reserve.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your current desire
to serve in the armed forces. However, the Board concluded
that your non-recommendation for reenlistment should not be
changed due to your unsatisfactory participation. The Board
particularly noted that you are 52 years old and would not be
able to serve long enough to qualify for a reserve pension if
you were allowed to reenlist. In view of the above, your
application has been denied. 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,

\o ‘Bon

W. DEAN PFET
Executive Dinréctor

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2007 | 07481-07

    Original file (07481-07.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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11146-09

    Original file (11146-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 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. 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 00550-07

    Original file (00550-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2008. On 29 May 1984 your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation due to your failure to attend regularly scheduled drills. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 10818-09

    Original file (10818-09.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 July 2010. At the time of your discharge, an RE-4 reenlistment code was assigned. 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 | CY2001 | 01038-01

    Original file (01038-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    in-charge (OINC) recommended to the discharge authority that you be discharged under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation. of your scheduled active duty for training and had sufficient time to make arrangements for child care, but you did not make the unit aware of problems until after your missed a drill and the period of active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02027-07

    Original file (02027-07.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, 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 Marine Corps Reserve on 11 July 1980. After review by the...