DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00

HD:hd
Docket No. 05726-06
16 July 2007

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of 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 12 July 2007. 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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 5 January 2007 with enclosure and 26 March 2Q07, copies of which are attached.

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. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions. 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 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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Enclosures

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND
5720 INTEGRITY DRIVE
MILLINGTON TN 38055-0000

					5812
												PERS-4832B 
												5 Jan 2007

MEMORANDUM FOR THE	 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS (BCNR)

Via:	PERS/BCNR Coordinator (PERS-31C)

Subj:	

Ref:	(a) MILPERSMAN 1160-030
		(b) MILPERSMAN 1616-030

End:	(1) BCNR File 05726-06
(2) Petitioner’s CD Service Record

1.	The petition and naval records of subject petitioner have been reviewed relative to his request for removal of derogatory evaluation and reinstatement of enlistment eligibility.

2.	The review reveals that the petitioner was convicted at a SPCM which precludes reenlistment eligibility within one year in accordance with reference (a). Subsequent to the SPCM, this office authorized denial of reenlistment in accordance with reference (b) . Therefore, favorable action on this petition is not recommended. Also, it is recommended that this petition be forwarded to the Enlisted Evaluations Section (PERS-311) regarding the performance evaluation issue.

Techni~1 Advisor to the
Head, Enlisted Performance and
Separations Section (PERS-4832)
—	—~____	

	DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
COMMANDING OFFPCER
NAVAL SIJBMARINE SUPPORT CENTER
                                       580 USS MARIANO 6. VALIEJO AVENUE
-	KINGS BAY, GA 31547.2626
	l6l6
Ser 00/084 26 Jun 06

From:	Commanding Officer, Naval Submarine Support Center, Kings Bay, Georgia
To:	Commander, Navy Personnel Command (PERS-4832)

Subj DENIAL OF REENLISTMENT RECOMMENDATION

Ref:	(a) NIILPERSMANl61-030
(b) OPN VINST 1160-5C

Requesting  Reenlistment in the Navy

1..	Per reference (a), enclosure (1) is forwarded recommending
	Disapproval riot recommended for retention due o is substandard military and personal conduct, inappropriate use of a government computer, and bringing discredit to himself and the Navy as evidenced from his Special Courts—Martial.   performance does not support reenhistujerit.. I have had the opportunity to directly observe his professional, military, and personal performance during the past two years. As a submarine Local Area Network Administrator, he was fully aware of the regulations regarding use of government computers. respect ~b domestic violence, despite an inordinate amount of counseling and intervention provided by this command and Fleet and Family Services, he continued to verbally and physically abuse his family. I do not have confidence in his judgment to be an effective leader and manager of government resources. Additionally, he requires direct supervision from senior enlisted and officer personnel within this command to appropriately manage personal domestic
matters to include providing timely financial support to his
dependents.

3. There have been no additional incidents of willful racism, sexism, sobriety issues,. or acting to deny equal opportunity as directed to comment on per reference (a).
	-- -•--. .. •	

2