DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 ยง, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BC
Docket No: 08242-13
1A
Aa DRasbamkhax+y ON
a Ta Mae: oot Men Soe AAR Bt Nee eS ne
pear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
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 27 August 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.
HW)
- U
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 Reserve on 28 August 1984. You were
honorably separated on 27 August 1987, and affiliated with a
drilling reserve unit. However, due to your failure to
participate in the Ready Reserve, you were separated with an
under other than honorable characterization of service by reason
of unsatisfactory participation on 3 May 1989, and assigned an
RE-4 (ineligible for reenlistment) reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors present
in your case, but found those factors insufficient to warrant
changing the characterization of service, given your record of
unsatisfactory participation in the Navy Reserve. Accordingly,
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 otticial recoras.
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,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00726 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. If another branch of service decides to waive your reenlistment code and accept you for enlistment, the Navy will not object. 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 | CY2010 | 00326-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 September 2010. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may have it reviewed by the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). 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 | CY2014 | NR5900 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05445-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. The ADB found that you had unsatisfactory participation and recommended a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05109-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 September 2006. 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 | NR5313 14
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 | CY2002 | 05852-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 January 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative of this regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. In this regard, your enlistment You On 30 November When informed of the recommendation, you elected to You received a general discharge from At that time you...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01609-10
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 | CY2010 | 08553-10
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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR336 14
after careful and conscientious consideration of che entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case because of your failure to satisfactorily participate in the Marine Corps Reserve and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...