_ DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1004
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BC
Docket No: 09132-13
24 July 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 23 July 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 Navy and began a period of active duty on 3
June 2002. On 19 October 2012, you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for being in an unauthorized absence (UA)
status for approximately 14 days. In a special evaluation from
16 March through 19 October 2012, you were not recommended for
retention. You were separated on 3 December 2012, with an
honorable characterization of service and assigned an RE-4 (not
recommended for reenlistment) reentry code while serving in pay
grade E-4.
You are advised that High Year Tenure (HYT) for a Sailor serving
in pay grade E-4 is eight years. You had over ten years of
service.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors present in
your case. However, the, Board found those factors were
insufficient to warrant any change in your reentry code, given
your record of an NJP for misconduct, non-recommendation for
reenlistment and HYT issue. Accordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
rt, is regretted that thé circumstances of your case are such
tpet ‘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,
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01352-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is denied reenlistment due to HYT because he is serving in pay grade E-2. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07845-02
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.The Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 20 October 1977 at age 20, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0270 14
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 3 June 2011, you received counseling informing you that you were ‘not recommended for promotion for a period of 12 months. 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 | CY2001 | 00825-01
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 June 2001. 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 | NR3903 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2014. In regard to your request for separation pay, the Board noted that this action was completed on 7 August 2013, and as such, no further consideration is warranted. 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 | NR0450 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 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. Consequentiy, 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 | NR0790 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05106-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Bpard consisted Board. Reenlistment beyond the HYT limit of 10 years was not authorized and assignment of an RE-6 reenlistment code was required. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08177-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You then reenlisted for six years on 9 March The record reflects that you were advanced to TM2 (E-5) on 16 January 1980 and served without incident until 6 May 1982 when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for failure to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0699 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 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. However, the Board found those factors insufficient Co warrant any change in your reentry code, given your record of conviction by SCM, high year tenure as a...