DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TOR
Docket No: 1601-10
18 November 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
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 16 November 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Your allegations of error an reviewed in
accordance with administrati d procedures
o 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 Nav age 17 and
immediately began a period of active duty. You served for a year
without disciplinary incident, but on 12 May 2000, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NOP) for two periods of unauthorized
absence (UA) totalling 29 days and missing the movement of your
ship. The punishment imposed was a $100 forfeiture of pay, extra
duty and restriction for 15 days, and a two month suspended
reduction to paygrade E-3.
In October 2001, due to your failure to comply with the Navy’s
Family Care Plan, you were not recommended for retention and were
informed that processing for an administrative separation had
been initiated. However, commanding officer requested that
you be retained in a shore billet until the completion of your
required active service. Subsequently, the discharge authority
approved this recommendation.
On 8 March 2003, upon completion of your required active service,
you were honorably released from active duty and transferred to
the Navy Reserve. 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.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and desire to change your
reenlistment code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your
reenlistment code because of your misconduct which resulted in
NIP. Further, the Board concluded that your nonrecommendation
for reenlistment was sufficient to support the assignment of an
RE-4 reenlistment code, which is authorized by regulatory
guidance. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The Board suggested that you may wish to apply for a waiver of
your RE-4 reenlistment code, if you would like to reenlist, with
branches of the armed forces other than the Navy.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11846-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 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 Reserve and began a period of active duty on 21 November 1974. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
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 | 12406-09
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. 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 your circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03173-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 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 | 02456-09
After careful an@ conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code given your adverse discharge evaluation which recommended that you not be allowed to reenlist. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03305-09
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06894-09
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 estabiish 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 | CY2010 | 01760-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 November 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...
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 | 11147-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2010. 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 1 July 1990. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...