Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10976-10
Original file (10976-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100

 

TOR .
Docket No: 10976-10
20 July 2011

This is in reference to your application for correction of your 4
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 19 July 2011. 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 90 percent of your assigned drills, .
specifically, 43 drills and 12 days of active duty for training.
On 18 April 1986 you enlisted in the Navy Reserve and began a
period of active duty on 3 November 1986. On 3 April 1987 you
were honorably released after serving 90 or more days of active
duty for training, and were returned to your reserve unit ina
drilling status.

Your record contains documentation which reflects that during the
‘period from 1 January to 31 December 1988 you did not participate
in any drilling activity. As a result, it appears that you were

notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of
unsatisfactory participation due to your failure to attend drills
as evidenced by your nonparticipation and unexcused absences.

Your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than
honorable conditions due to unsatisfactory participation as
evidenced by your failure to maintain satisfactory drill
attendance. The discharge authority approved this recommendation
and directed your commanding officer to issue you an other than
honorable discharge by reason of unsatisfactory participation,
and on 16 December 1988, you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your post service good conduct and desire to upgrade your other
than honorable discharge. Nevertheless, the Board concluded
‘these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization
of your discharge because of your failure to satisfactorily
attend scheduled drills. Finally, in the absence of any evidence
that your missed drills were excused, and as such 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,

La Dean

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01499-07

    Original file (01499-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRSDocket No: 1499-078 January 2008This is in reference to your application for correction of naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the UnitedStates Code section 1552.A three-memberpanel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive Records, sitting in executive session, Considered your application on 28 November 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3159-13

    Original file (NR3159-13.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. 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. As such, on 10 July 1984, ‘you enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve and began a period of active duty for training.

  • 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 | 08558-10

    Original file (08558-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 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 | CY2010 | 01609-10

    Original file (01609-10.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 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 | CY2008 | 02589-08

    Original file (02589-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 | CY2005 | 06815-05

    Original file (06815-05.rtf) 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 7 November 1986. After review by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00414-08

    Original file (00414-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2008. On 19 February 1986 your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with a discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of unsatisfactory participation due to your failure to attend regularly scheduled drills. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13164-09

    Original file (13164-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 05086-09

    Original file (05086-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 2010. Under the terms of your enlistment contract, you were required to participate in 48 drills and perform 14 days of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) each year. ‘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.