DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
ELP
Docket No. 5850-01
13 December 2001
Dear
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.
Your allegations of error and injustice were
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records,
sitting in executive session,
12 December 2001.
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.
considered your application on
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 served without incident and were advanced to ABH3 (E-4).
You enlisted in the Navy on 19 July 1990 for four years at age
18.
On 18 July 1994 you were honorably released from active duty and
transferred to the Naval Reserve.
upon completion of your obligated service on 25 July 1997.
You were honorably discharged
The record reflects that you enlisted in the Naval Reserve on
28 December 1998.
file in available records.
6 March 1999, when you were placed on report for refusing to
submit to a urinalysis test on 30 January 1999.
However, the enlistment document is not on
You served without incident until
On 30 March 1999, the command initiated action to separate you by
reason of unsatisfactory participation as evidenced by your
failure to provide a urine specimen.
was sent by certified mail to your last known address.
Notification of this action
However,
the notification was returned marked as
"unclaimed.VV
The record further reflects that you reenlisted in the Navy on
29 April 1999 for two years as an AN (E-3).
wavier of a break in service of more than four years and were
approved for conversion to the
A0 rating under the PRISE III
Program.
The enlistment documents show that you only reported
your prior active service but did not report your enlistment in
the Naval Reserve.
You were granted a
On 8 June 1999, the commanding officer of the reserve unit
notified the Chief of Naval Personnel of your unsatisfactory
participation in the Ready Reserve and advised that you would be
separated within 10 days with a general discharge.
your enlistment in the Navy for an additional period of four
months on 6 July 1999.
You extended
A special Evaluation Report and Counseling Record submitted on
29 February 2000 noted that your rate was changed to AOAN (E-3)
after passing an
A03 examination, but you were not advanced. On
30 March 2000, a special evaluation was submitted to withdraw the
command's recommendation for your advancement, which stated there
would be "significant
marginal mark of 2.0
military bearing/character.
standards"") in all other categories.
that you had failed to pay government credit card bills in a
timely manner and your inability to adhere to Navy core values
had made you an administrative burden to the command.
(llprogressingll) was assigned in the trait of
problemsV1 if your were promoted. A
You were marked 3.0 ("meets
The reporting senior noted
The evaluation for the period ending 15 July 2000 showed you were
now promotable and meeting standards in all categories.
on 20 October 2000, another special evaluation again removed the
command's recommendation for your advancement, marked you as
having "significant problems"
and lowered the mark in "military
bearing/ character" to 2.0.
The reporting senior stated this
mark was due to your making a false statement to a first class
petty officer, for which you received extra military instruction.
The evaluation submitted incident to your discharge continued to
mark you 2.0 in "military bearing/character", but recommended you
for retention.
You were honorably discharged on 13 April 2001 as
an AOAN, and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
However,
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individuals who do not meet the professional growth criteria
at the time of discharge.
individual must be serving as a petty officer or serving in pay
grade E-3 having passed an examination for advancement to pay
grade E-4.
you were first separated.
discharged from your second enlistment, you had not advanced
Therefore, you met the criteria for reenlistment when
For the first reenlistment, an
However, at the time you were
2
Since you
The Board found
beyond E-3 and were not recommended for advancement.
were not an E-4 at the time of discharge, you did not meet the
professional growth criteria for reenlistment.
it disturbing that you made no mention of your Naval Reserve
service at the time of your reenlistment.
been reenlisted had this service been disclosed is unknown.
contention that you were experiencing serious marital problems
does not provide a valid basis for changing a reenlistment code.
Although you were recommended for reenlistment in the last
evaluation, two prior evaluations within the last 12 months of
service indicated significant problems and withdrew the command's
recommendation for advancement.
Given your documented problems
in performance and conduct,
and since you had not advanced to pay
grade E-4 by the time of your discharge, the Board concluded that
the reenlistment code was proper and no change is warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Whether you would have
Your
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken.
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.
You are entitled to have
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04708-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 12 December 2001. 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. failure to pay a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03909-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, the Board concluded that your reenlistment code was assigned based on your performance during your last year on active duty, and that you were counseled concerning the fact that you were not eligible to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00303-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, Your allegations of error and injustice were 8 May 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 13-month period documenting three counselings and problems with your government credit card debt provided sufficient justify- cation for a non-recommendation for retention and assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03796-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. A review In this military bearing/character, and Your record further reflects that you received an adverse special enlisted performance evaluation for the period of 16 June to 12 November 2001 to document the removal...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08743-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 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. You believe there was disparate treatment because the chief petty officer only received a punitive letter of reprimand and was retained in the Navy,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08499-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 July 2007. 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 | CY2008 | 02092-08
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 concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because of your disciplinary record which resulted in two NUPs, failure of professional growth criteria, and nonrecommendation for retention or reenlistment. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08262-01
1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show an honorable discharge and an RE-1 reenlistment code. He refused Captain's Mast The Board met on 17 The performance evaluation Petitioner received from the TEMDU command, for the period 24 April to 24 November 2000, is also...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03837-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 26 January 2011. 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 this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is authorized when an individual is discharged at the expiration of his term of active obligated service...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02895-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEXWASHINGTON DC 203705100 TRGDocket No: 2895-061 November 2006From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OFRef: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual completes an extended period of active duty and is serving in pay grade E-2. Since he was recommended for advancement and retention in his last...