DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX REC
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 00706-11
2 November 2011
Wa:
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 Boara for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 2 November 2011. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
reguiations 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
recore, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on
17 January 1986. During recruit training, you received numerous
opportunities to successfully pass the academic tests. After
three failures of tests it was determined that your lack of
military bearing and failure to conform to the military warranted
an administrative separation and assignment of a reenlistment
code of RE-4 for entry level performance and conduct. On 11
March 1986, you were discharged with an uncharacterized entry
level separation due to your performance and conduct.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change of the narrative reason for
separation or reenlistment code, which were based on your
performance and conduct. in this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment
code is appropriately assigned when an individual is discharged
for substandard performance and conduct, and is not recommended
for retention. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The names and votes of the members of the panel wiil 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,
W. DEAN PPE
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09660-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 August 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 | CY2007 | 04906-07
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03619-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 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 | CY2009 | 13095-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 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 | CY2014 | NR3855 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 May 2015. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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 | CY2007 | 02697-07
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 3 July 1986 at age 20. As a result, you were administratively processed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01254-10
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. Since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of that code in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is gr® the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11919-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 July 2011. On 22 October 1987, administrative discharge action wag initiated to separate you by reason of fraudulent entry. 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 | 00352-11
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 a change in your reenlistment code because of your misconduct, which resulted in NUP, deficiencies in your performance, continuous failing of physical fitness tests, and the nonrecommendation for retention; all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06479-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...