DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BIG
Docket No: 5518-10
1 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 1 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.
You reenlisted in the Navy on 27 March 2006 after more than 11
years of prior honorable service. In your rating of
information technology, you were required to have a security
clearance. Unfortunately, due to your financial difficulties,
it was revoked. You attempted to convert to a rating where a
security clearance would not be required, however, on 26
January 2009, this request was disapproved. You were notified
that you were being recommended for administrative separation
due to unsatisfactory performance. You waived your procedural
right an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 11 December
2009, you were honorably discharged due to unsatisfactory
performance, and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reentry code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior
honorable service, financial difficulties, and current desire
to reenlist. However, the Board concluded that neither your
reentry code nor your separation code should be changed due to
the revocation of your security clearance. The Board noted
that you waived your right to an ADB, your best opportunity for
retention. ,fln view of the above, 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 on the applicant to
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
ees
Executive oO
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06102-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 March 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. On 6 May 2010 you were notified of pending separation action by reason of unsatisfactory performance due to the loss of your security clearance.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02548-09
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 thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your reenlistment code. 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 | CY2011 | 11272 11
g. In March 2011, after being notified of the deficiency in his clearance status, Petitioner re-submitted the required security questionnaire documents to obtain the required security clearance. He had never been held back in any way from progressing through his Navy career due to security clearance issues and he was not aware that there was a deficiency that would disqualify him from competing for advancement. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12399-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2009. On 17 June 1993, the discharge authority directed an OTH discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. 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 | NR2452 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The advisory recommended that his RE-4 reentry code not be changed in light of the loss of his security clearance. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by , ‘changing block 26 (Separation Code) of his DD Form 214 from “HHI” to “JBK”, and that biock 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) be changed from “Unsatisfactory Performance” to - *Completion...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03183-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 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. On 24 January 2003, the Department of the Navy, Central Adjudication Facility (DON CAF) informed you via your commanding officer (CO), of their...
NAVY | DRB | 2010_Navy | ND1001868
: (Nondecisional) The Applicant contends that he should have been given separation pay.The NDRB has no jurisdiction over separation pay as regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.Only the Board for Correction of Naval Records can make determinations related to separation pay. Relief denied.Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and the administrative...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2626 14
ih thres-membex,, panel of the Board for Correction of Naval .. ‘Records, sitting.in executive session, considered your .. a ‘application:on 25 March 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. Finally, an RE-4 reentry code must be assigned to all Sailors discharged due to unsatisfactory performance as a result of having there...
NAVY | DRB | 2011_Navy | ND1101345
Representation: NONE By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include...
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...