Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01254-10
Original file (01254-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

Docket No: 12054-10
24 February 2011

 

 

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 February 2011. 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 enlisted in the Navy Reserve on 2
September 1986. On 3 October 1986 your commanding officer
directed that you be separated based on your concealment of a
pre-service history of extensive drug abuse. On 16 October 1986
you received an entry level separation by reason of fraudulent
entry and were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.

The Board noted that a reenlistment code of RE-4 is required by
regulatory guidance to be assigned to service members separated
by reason of fraudulent entry. Since you have been treated no
differently than others in your situation, the Board could not
find an error or injustice in the assignment of that code in your
case.

The Board found your desire for a second chance insufficient to
demonstrate that it would be in the interest of justice for the
Board to change your reenlistment code as an exception to policy.
Accordingly, 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 grĀ® the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable, Material error or injustice.

%

Sincerely,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01222-08

    Original file (01222-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2008. 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 | 11919-10

    Original file (11919-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2011. On 22 October 1987, administrative discharge action wag initiated to separate you by reason of fraudulent entry. 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 | CY2002 | 00870-01

    Original file (00870-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    870-01 24 January 2002 Dear Mr.- 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. considered your application on Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 16 January 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 3...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05864-10

    Original file (05864-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed 4n accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 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 | 04494-10

    Original file (04494-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2011. However, the Board concluded that your RE-4 reentry code should not be changed due to your non-completion of recruit training and failure to disclose your psychiatric history. 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 | 10211-10

    Original file (10211-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 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. 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 | CY2007 | 05975-07

    Original file (05975-07.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.You enlisted in the Navy on 25 March 1986 at age 19. After review, the discharge authority...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11151-09

    Original file (11151-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2010 | 08372-10

    Original file (08372-10.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 20 August 2007, you were the subject of a medical evaluation that diagnosed you with asthma, a condition that existed prior to enlistment and is not correctable to meet Navy physical Standards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13095-09

    Original file (13095-09.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 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...