Y
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203704100
TRG
Docket No: 7149-98
15 April 1999
Dear
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 13 April 1999.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
of this
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings
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.
Your allegations of error and
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 record shows that you received nonjudicial
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 16 July 1970 at
age 18.
punishment on two occasions and were convicted by a summary
court-martial. Your offenses were three periods of unauthorized
absence totaling about eight days.
You
processed for separation under an early release program.
were issued a general discharge on 16 January 1973.
you were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an
RR-4 reenlistment code.
Subsequently you were
At that time
Character of service is based, in part, on conduct and overall
trait averages which are computed from marks assigned during
periodic evaluations.
were 2.4 and 3.21, respectively.
in conduct was required at the time of your separation for a
fully honorable characterization of service.
Your conduct and overall trait averages
A minimum average mark of 3.0
On 23 February 1977 the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB)
that a summary court-martial
concluded, by a three to two vote,
conviction for an unauthorized absence of about 13 hours and the
assignment of a 1.0 mark in conduct at'that time was unduly
Subsequently, the majority recommendation of the
severe.
NDFIB to
Your
recharacterize the discharge to honorable was approved.
record has been corrected to show that you received an honorable
discharge on 16 January 1973.
Subsequently, you were granted a waiver and enlisted in the Army
National Guard on 27 March 1987.
manner until you were honorably discharged in the grade of SGT
(E-5) on 26 March 1998.
that time.
You were recommended for reenlistment at
You then served in an excellent
You are now requesting a change in the RE-4 reenlistment code
assigned by the Navy so that you can enlist in the Naval Reserve.
You contend that your many years of excellent service in the
National Guard shows that you have overcome the problems which
led to the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code by the Navy.
The Board concluded that a record which included three
disciplinary actions was sufficient to support the assignment of
an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board noted your years of good
service in the National Guard, but concluded that it did not
outweigh your record of three disciplinary actions in the Navy.
The names and
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00214-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. Board found that these factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service on release from active duty, given your disciplinary record and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06283-01
were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of the general discharge given your record of misconduct, failure to achieve the required average mark in conduct, misconduct. The Board concluded that the general discharge by The Board found that these factors and your discharge by reason of Concerning the reenlistment code, the Board noted that regulations require the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02635-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2008. 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 29 December 1972, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00198-99
Your allegations of error and 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 were ordered to The The Board found that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 26 August 1991 for eight years at age 20. active duty for a period of two years on 4 December 1991. record reflects that you were advanced to SN (E-3) and served without incident until...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00159-99
in your record. Regulations required the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals discharged command due to substandard performance or by reason of inability to adapt to military service." The Board noted that you have applied for the Navy The Board also noted that the commanding and that your contention that You contend that you NJPs in only 16 months of service.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08559-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval and health records, 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 13_04_27 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 11_59_57 CST 2001
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 September 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06695-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 March 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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00613-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the @%iSstence of...