DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SJN
Docket No: 11846-09
30 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 24 August 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 Reserve and began a period of active
duty on 21 November 1974. The Board found that the record
reflects you received five nonjudicial punishments (NUJP’s) for
four periods of unauthorized absence, two instances of
disobedience, failure to go to your appointed place of duty, and
disrespect. On 19 November 1976, you were honorably released
from active duty and transferred to the Navy Reserve.
Ultimately, you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, which
Means you were not recommended for retention.
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 given your five NUP'’s ina
two year period. In this regard, you were assigned the
appropriate reenlistment code based on your misconduct.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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,
Lo Wank
W. DEAN PF
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12874-09
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. 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 | 02339-09
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. However, the performance evaluation for the period from 16 March to 17 November 2000 states, in part, that you were not recommended for retention because you did not complete your obligated service requirements as stipulated in | — your 10 July 1997 agreement. Nevertheless, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10335-09
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. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10727-09
A three-member panel of the Board ‘for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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 | 03429-09
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. If not, the individual must be assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your period of Satisfactory service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01774-09
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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, desire to change your reenlistment code, and removal of documentation referring to periods of UA. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06699-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 2010. 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 | 01728-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. 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 21 November 1968 at age 19. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13127-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for separation. An RE-4 reenlistment code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00015-10
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...