DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJIR
Docket No: 4508-09
12 April 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 cf Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 6 April 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.
You enlisted in the Navy on 8 June 2000 at age 17. You served
without disciplinary incident until 11 January 2001, when you
received nonjudicial punishment (NUP). However, the record does
not reflect the offenses for which NUP was imposed.
Your record reflects a separation performance evaluation for the
period from 16 June 2003 to 7 June 2004 which states, in part,
that you were not recommended for advancement, retention, or
reenlistment. Accordingly, on 7 June 2004, you were honorably
released from active duty and transferred to the Navy Reserve.
--and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 26 January 2008
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 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 NUP. Further, the Board
concluded that your misconduct and nonrecommendation for
reenlistment were 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, if you wish, you may apply for a waiver
of your RE-4 reenlistment code 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 1s 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,
Executive D r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06271-09
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. On 31 July 2004 you received NJP for assaulted consummated by battery and were awarded restriction and extra duty for 45 days, reduction to paygrade E-2, and a $1,412 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09023-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on @ June 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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01736-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . Documentary ; material considered by thé 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09771-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 June 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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02258-09
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 | 01742-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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 | 04238-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2010. On 10 May 1988, you received NIP for UA from you appointed place of duty. 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 | 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 | 09392-09
“A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 July 2010. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in 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 | CY2009 | 12874-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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...