DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
‘ 2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 1609-10
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 the Board for Correction of Naval
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 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.
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.
On 17 December 2006 you enlisted in the Navy Reserve and served
without disciplinary incident.
Your record contains a Navy Standard Integrated Personnel System
report which reflects that during the period from September 2008
to August 2009 you were absent from drills on 20 occasions.
Although eight of these occasions were authorized absences,
coupled with your 12 unexcused absences, your nonparticipation in
assigned drills represented about 63 percent.
As a result of the foregoing, you were notified by certified and
registered mail of pending administrative separation action by
reason of unsatisfactory participation due to your failure to
attend drills as evidenced by nine or more unexcused absences.
On 28 July 2009 your commanding officer recommended discharge
stating that you were no longer an asset to the Navy due to
unsatisfactory participation. The recommendation also noted, in
part, that you had failed to maintain satisfactory drill
attendance. Subsequently, the discharge authority approved this
recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you
a general discharge by reason of unsatisfactory participation.
At that time the discharge authority stated that you were not
recommended for reenlistment because of your failure to maintain
at least an 85% satisfactory drill participation. On 7 August
2009 you were issued a general discharge under honorable
conditions and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to reenlist. It also considered your assertion that
while in the processing of joining the Army, you were separated
from the Navy Reserve. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your
reenlistment status, specifically, your nonrecommendation for
reenlistment due to your failure to satisfactorily attend
scheduled drills. Finally, in the absence of any evidence that
your nonrecommendation for reenlistment, specifically, the
assigned RE-4 reenlistment code, was in error, the Board
concluded 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 PFE
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04125-12
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 | CY2008 | 02573-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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 | 13164-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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 | CY2012 | 00726 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. If another branch of service decides to waive your reenlistment code and accept you for enlistment, the Navy will not object. 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 | 10976-10
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. On 18 April 1986 you enlisted in the Navy Reserve and began a period of active duty on 3 November 1986. 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 | CY2009 | 08541-09
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 | CY2010 | 11291-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change of your reenlistment status because of your failure to satisfactorily attend scheduled drills and misconduct as evidenced by your failure to pay just debts and misuse of a government credit card. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5313 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2015. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to satisfactorily...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08312-09
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 | 02736-09
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...