Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8257 13
Original file (NR8257 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
ies

 

 

 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1004
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

BC
Docket No: 08257-13
16 January 2014

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 ef 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 15 January 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.

ful and conscientious consideration of the entire
ra found the evidence submitted was insufficient

a
ablish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

12 February 2008. On 2 December 2010, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for making a false official statement, and
failure to obey an order or regulation. On 13 January 2011, you
received NUP for three incidents of failure to obey an order or
regulation. On your final evaluation you were not recommended
for retention. On 11 February 2012, you were honorably released
from active duty and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for

retention) reentry code.

The Board concluded that a change in your reentry code was not
warranted. In this regard, it noted that an RE-4 reentry code
is required when an individual is not recommended for retention,
as in your case. 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
= bresumotion of reqularity attaches to all official records.

a presumpeic epee oer Se

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,

PR pecan Rees

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0265 14

    Original file (NR0265 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 July 2014. On 30 January 2009, you received NUP for failure to obey an order/regulation by operating a government vehicle while exceeding the speed limit. 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 | NR4152 13

    Original file (NR4152 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 2014. record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official ‘snaval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6580-13

    Original file (NR6580-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | NR4152-13

    Original file (NR4152-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0649 14

    Original file (NR0649 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 18 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. You were separated on 15 July 2011, with an honorable discharge due to non-retention on active duty and assigned an RE-3C (when directed by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03760-10

    Original file (03760-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval, Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 January 2011. You were notified of pending administrative discharge processing with an other than honorable (OTH) discharge due to misconduct. 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 | NR6081 13

    Original file (NR6081 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval “Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2014. On 10 June 1998, you were honorably released from active duty and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment code. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official _haval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03837-10

    Original file (03837-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 26 January 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is authorized when an individual is discharged at the expiration of his term of active obligated service...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02294-11

    Original file (02294-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 November 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00475 12

    Original file (00475 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 24 October 2012. 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...