Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05932-01
Original file (05932-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAVY!  ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370.5100

BJG
Docket No: 5932-01
17 August 2001

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. You requested that your
reenlistment code of RE-4 (not eligible for reenlistment without prior approval of the Chief
of Naval Personnel) be changed to RE-3P (eligible for reenlistment except for disqualifying
- physical disability). You contend that you were not recommended for reenlistment
factor 
solely because of your failure to meet physical readiness standards, and that this did not
warrant the RE-4 code.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 15 August 2001. 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 this connection, the Board found your noncompliance with the physical

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.
readiness standards was a valid basis for recommending against your reenlistment. Further,
they found nothing to support a conclusion that you had any physical disability. In view of
the above, 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.
regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official

In this

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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04381-10

    Original file (04381-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. Your receipt of disability ratings from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was not considered probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material erres ar injustice .

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01312-11

    Original file (01312-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 2011. However, the Board concluded that you were correctly assigned an RE-4 reentry code due to your physical readiness issues and non-recommendation for retention. 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 | CY1999 | 01921-99

    Original file (01921-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    An RE-4 reenlistment code means that the individual is ineligible for reenlistment without prior approval from Commander, Naval Personnel Command. Absent evidence to the contrary, a presumption exists that action by the Navy to discharge you by reason of "failed physical standards" was both appropriate and proper. Since you received the most favorable reenlistment code authorized by regulation, the Board could find no error or injustice in the assigned reenlistment code.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08322-00

    Original file (08322-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your honorable service and your contention that your narrative reason for separation and reenlistment code are administrative errors because you served without any disciplinary actions. Accordingly, your application has been This disorder constituted a physical the narrative reason for separation is an RE-3P reenlistment code was Given all the circumstances of The...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09652-08

    Original file (09652-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2009. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized when a Sailor is discharged due to PRT failure and not recommended for retention. 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 | CY2001 | 08283-01

    Original file (08283-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested that your reenlistment code of RE-4 (not eligible for reenlistment without prior approval of the Chief of Naval Personnel) be changed. - physical disability) and a medical waiver, you could A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 December 2001. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03521-00

    Original file (03521-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on former Sergeant equest to have his records corrected to show that he was not discharged from the Marine Corps on 27 May 1999, and to further show that he is retired by reason of physical disability. MMEA concurs with the recommendation made by Mrs. Jr., Head, Separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07822-00

    Original file (07822-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    you exercised poor judgment and immaturity in the handling of your financial affairs, been involved in two incidents of The reporting senior noted that during this period Your performance as an EW2 However, the domestic violence, and failed your semi-annual physical readiness test. discharged on 24 March 2000 with an You were not recommended for retention and were honorably RX-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01966-09

    Original file (01966-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Commanding Officer recommended that you remain in the Navy until completion of your obligated service, and at that time you received an RE-4 reenlistment code based on three failures of your required PFA's. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07250-07

    Original file (07250-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.On 25 April 2001, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. Regulations also direct assignment of an RE-4...