DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 2565-10
16 November 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions af 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 16 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 and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
error or injustice. You entered active duty in the Navy on 29
November 1984, and served honorably until 28 November 1992. On
14 December 2001, you reenlisted in the Navy Reserve for four
years. On 3 March 2005, you were notified that you were being
administratively separated due to unsatisfactory drill
participation (Dental Class III) with a general discharge and
assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment
code. You were so discharged on 12 April 2005.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prier
honorable and desire to reenlist in the armed forces. However,
the Board concluded that your reenlistment code should not be
changed due to your unsatisfactory drill participation. In
view of the above, your application has been denied. The names
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply
to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible
upgrade. I have enclosed the NDRB’s application (DD Form 293)
for your convenience.
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 P
Executive e or
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00326-10
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 | BCNR | CY2010 | 01609-10
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 | CY2012 | 00427-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2012. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible upgrade. 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 02074-07
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 30 July 2004. The Board concluded that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11080-09
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 | CY2013 | NR968 13
The Board did not consider your request to upgrade your discharge and change your narrative reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. On 16 February 2011, you were discharged with a general characterization of service due to unsatisfactory...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04675-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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. 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 | 11146-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 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 | 00590-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2010. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible upgrade. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the exjystence of probable material error or injustice.