DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S, COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BC
Docket No: 08742-13
23 June 2014
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 18 June 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 14 January 2008. On
13 October 2008, you received counseling concerning your failure
to report to a scheduled temporary active duty period at Camp
Pendleton, California. On 25 October 2008, you were informed
that administrative discharge processing had been initiated and
that you could receive an under other than honorable
characterization (UOTHC) of service due to your failure to
attend 10 required drill periods (unsatisfactory participation) .
You waived your administrative rights. Your commanding officer
forwarded his recommendation to the discharge authority, who
concurred and directed a UOTHC discharge by reason of
unsatisfactory participation. On.21 April 2009, you were so
discharged and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for
reenlistment) reentry code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors in your
case. .It found those factors insufficient to warrant changing
the reentry code, given your record of unsatisfactory
participation. 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 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,
TRS Co
ROBERT D. 4SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2133 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 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 | NR5810 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2014. On 4 April 2008, you were discharged with a general characterization of service due to unsatisfactory participation and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5794 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2014. On 4 April 2008, you were discharge@ with a general characterization of service due to unsatisfactory participation and assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6060 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 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 onthe applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR7474 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application: on 11 Decembér 2013. 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 21 July 2009, your command attempted to notify you that administrative discharge procedures had been initiated and that you could receive a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5179 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 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. Nevertheless, the Board found those factors insufficient to warrant changing the characterization of your discharge, given your NJP, narrative...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR968 13
The Board did not consider your request to upgrade your discharge and change your narrative reason for separation because you have not exhausted your administrative remedy of applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2013. On 16 February 2011, you were discharged with a general characterization of service due to unsatisfactory...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6320 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 | CY2010 | 05269-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2011. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to change your reentry code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the ‘existence of probab¥e material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4751 13
You may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB). 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. 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.