DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 8. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
BC
Docket No: 02133-14
5 August 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 30 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 Reserve on 26 July 2007. Between 13
September 2008 and 2 May 2009, you failed to participate in 12
drills. Your command attempted to notify you that
administrative discharge procedures had been initiated and that
you could receive a general discharge due to your failure to
attend required drill periods (unsatisfactory participation) .
You failed to reply to the notification letter. Thereafter,
your commanding officer recommended that you be separated with a
general discharge by reason of unsatisfactory participation.
The discharge authority concurred and directed a general
discharge. On 21 May 2009, you were so discharged and assigned
an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reentry 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 your reentry code, given your record of unsatisfactory
participation in the Navy Reserve. The Board did not accept
your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that your absences
from training were because you were on maternity leave.
Accordingly, and as you have not demonstrated that it would be
in the interest of justice for the Board to assign you a more
favorable reentry code as an exception to policy, 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,
Oe SED | fe
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director
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 | 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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8742 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2014. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully considered all potentially mitigating factors in your case. 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 | NR4184-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . On 20 June 2005,, you received a general under honorable conditions characterization of service due to unsatisfactory participation, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) 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 | 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 | CY2008 | 11049-08
A three-member panei of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 November 2009. 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 | CY2012 | 01110 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00427-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 February 2012. Since your discharge is less than 15 years old, you may apply to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) for a possible upgrade. 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 | 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.