DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 11131-09
28 July 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 28 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 served honorably
on active-duty in the Navy from 11 June 2002 to 18 June 2007,
but were assigned an RE-3M reenlistment code due to non-
retention. You were then assigned to a Navy Reserve unit. On
12 June and 30 July 2008, you were notified that you had failed
to comply with Individual Medical Readiness (IMR) requirements.
You were notified that you were going to be administratively
separated due to failure to comply with IMR requirements with a
general discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code. You were so
discharged on 19 April 2009.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior
honorable service. However, the Board concluded that your
discharge should not be upgraded, that you should not be
reinstated in the Navy Reserve, nor promoted to pay grade E-5
due to your failure to comply with the IMR requirements. The
Board noted that it was your responsibility to keep your
reserve unit informed of your mailing address. 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,
W. DEAN PRSIRRER
Executive Dirbgtor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12880-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. Shortly thereafter, on 13 July 2006, you were notified of pending administrative separation action due to alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11054-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on $ June 2009. After review, the separation authority directed an honorable discharge due te parenthood or custody of minor children: and the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment .code.-.You--« were so discharged on 13 September 2006. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01110 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 2012. 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 | 06102-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 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. On 6 May 2010 you were notified of pending separation action by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to the loss of your security clearance.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02646-07
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 11 July 1977 at age 18. At that time you were correctly assigned an RE-2...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR876 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. Because of a civil court case Secretary of the Navy was directed to reconsider his decision made in the Records (BCNR) to consider your case regarding your forced retirement per the FY09 Colonel SRB. 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 | 02548-09
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. The Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your 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 | CY2010 | 01601-10
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 you were not recommended for further retention or reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 23 October 2006 you were honorably discharged at the expiration of your enlistment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09155-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 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 | CY2010 | 01609-10
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%...