DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BJG
Docket No: 4355-13
7 April 2014
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 April 2014. 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 Navy and entered active duty on 30 June
2005. You were convicted by two summary courts-martial of three
periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totaling 169 days and
missing the movement of your ship. You were also in a UA status
for 25 days for which no disciplinary action was taken. On 15
July 2008, you received an adverse performance evaluation in
which you were not recommended for promotion or retention. On 9
February 2010, you completed your active duty obligation in pay
grade E-1, were honorably transferred to the Navy Reserve, and
assigned an RE-4 (not. recommended for retention) reentry code.
On 5 January 2013, you were honorably discharged from the Navy
Reserve in pay grade E-1, and not recommended for reenlistment.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and
current desire to change your reentry code and reinstate your
pay grade to E-3. However, the Board concluded that you were
correctly assigned the RE-4 reentry code due to your acts of
misconduct ‘and non-recommendation for retention. The Board
found no basis to reinstate your pay grade to E-3. You are
advised that UA time does. not count as active duty. The Board
believed that you were fortunate to receive an honorable
discharge, since Sailors who have committed misconduct normally
receive other than honorable characterizations of service. You
are further advised that no reentry code is changed due merely
to the passage of time or post service good conduct. 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,
Tee, a
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3348 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2014. On 15 October 2008, you were discharged in pay grade E-2 with a general characterization of service due to misconduct, and assigned an RE-4 reentry 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 | CY2013 | NR9132 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2014. 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2391 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 June 2014. However, the Board found no basis to reinstate you or change your reentry code based on your adverse fitness reports, failure of the PFT, service limitation for a sergeant, and non-recommendation for retention. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5192 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 2014. You exercised your procedural right have your case heard by an administrative discharge board (ADB). On 11 December 2012, you received a general under honorable conditions characterization of service due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6580-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2014. 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 completed your required active duty on 3 February 1999 in pay grade E-2, were honorably transferred to the Navy Reserve, and assigned an RE-4 (not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR028 14
— A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR3446-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR3577-13
© A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. 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 23 November 1997, you completed your Navy Reserve obligation, were honorably discharged in pay grade E-3, and not recommended for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0537 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July -2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded those factors insufficient to warrant a change in the reentry code based on non-recommendation for retention in pay grade E-3. 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 | NR8602 13
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 $. 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 material error or injustice.