Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13164-09
Original file (13164-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

TUR
Docket No: 13164-09
16 September 2010

    

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10; 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 14 September 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
injuetice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 25 April 2001, immediately began a
period of active duty, and served without disciplinary incident.
Subsequently, you were released from active duty and returned to
the Navy Reserve in a ready reserve status. Your veeord reflects
that as of October 2006, you had accumulated a total of 10
unexcused absences and because of your noncompliance to
reschedule drills or contact your unit regarding adjudication of
the unexcused absences, you were an unsatisfactory participant.

It appears that as a result of the foregoing, you were processed
for an administrative separation by reason of the convenience of
the government due to unsatisfactory participation in the Ready
Reserve as evidenced by your failure to attend drill. The
discharge authority directed your discharge by reason of the
convenience of the government due to your inability to maintain
satisfactory drill attendance. As a result of this action, on 22
October 2006 you were issued a general under honorable conditions
discharge certificate. At that time you were advised that you
were not recommended for re-affiliation or reenlistment.

The Board, in its review of your record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to change your reenlistment code and assertion that
you were not properly indoctrinated regarding instructions and
guidelines for drilling. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your
reenlistment or re-affiliation status, specifically, your
nonrecommendation for reenlistment due to your failure to
satisfactorily attend scheduled drills. In the absence of any
evidence that your nonrecommendation for reenlistment was in
error, the Board assumed that sufficient evidence existed to
support the discharge authority's decision. 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,

W. DEAN PFENF
Executive D ie

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 | 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 | 08541-09

    Original file (08541-09.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 August 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 | 11080-09

    Original file (11080-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 2010. On 13 June 1983, you were honorably discharged from the Navy Reserve and were recommended for reenlistment. 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 | CY2012 | 04125-12

    Original file (04125-12.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. Prior to your entry into the Navy Reserve, you signed an enlistment contract in which you were advised that you “must” perform at least 85 percent of your assigned drills, specifically, 48 drills and 12 days of active duty for training. Finally, the Board concluded that sufficient evidence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00820-09

    Original file (00820-09.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 May 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 | 08312-09

    Original file (08312-09.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 August 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 | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1501140

    Original file (ND1501140.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, service record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable at the time of discharge. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) and the narrative reason for separation shall remain UNSATISFACTORY PARTICIPATION. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00326-10

    Original file (00326-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may have it reviewed by the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). 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 | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1401649

    Original file (ND1401649.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks a change to his RE-code.2. The Applicant contends he was wrongly discharged from a drilling status.The Applicant contends he was either present for the annotated missed drills or they were authorized absences. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...