Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06857-10
Original file (06857-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BUG
Docket No: 6857-10
9 March 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 8 March 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 enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 30 April 1993. Your
record is incomplete, but on 15 December 1999, you were removed
from a drill assignment in the Ready Reserve due to
unsatisfactory participation and transferred to the Individual
Ready Reserve. On 29 January 2000, you were honorably
discharged from the Naval Reserve, and recommended for
reenlistment. It appears that you reenlisted in the Naval
Reserve and served until 26 July 2005, when you received a
general discharge due to unsatisfactory participation in the
Ready Reserve, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
retention) reenlistment code.

In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall
record, prior honorable service, and desire to reenlist.
However, the Board concluded that your reenlistment code should
not be changed due your unsatisfactory 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.

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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04269-12

    Original file (04269-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2013. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02633-10

    Original file (02633-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 January 2011. On 9 March 2007 your commanding officer recommended an administrative separation by reason of unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve due to failure to maintain medical readiness as evidenced by noncompliance with TNPQ status update requirements. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11291-10

    Original file (11291-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 11506-10

    Original file (11506-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 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. 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 | 07896-10

    Original file (07896-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. However, the Board concluded that you were correctly assigned the RE-4 reentry code due to your failure to participate in the Ready Reserve, and non-recommendation for retention. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02573-08

    Original file (02573-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2008 | 02721-08

    Original file (02721-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 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. In early 2007 you were processed for an administrative separation due to unsatisfactory participation in the Navy Reserve.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5313 14

    Original file (NR5313 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | 07060-10

    Original file (07060-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 March 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board concluded, however, that your discharge should not be upgraded due to your unsatisfactory performance.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08553-10

    Original file (08553-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 LHIUBELeS: You reenlisted in the Navy Reserve on 27 August 1991 after more than three years of honorable...