DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL
2 NAVY ANNE
X
RECORD
S
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
TRG
Docket No: 5950-01
8 November 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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 6 November 2001.
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.
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 enlisted performance record (page 9) shows that in the
16, September 1989 to 30 June 1990, you
You enlisted in the Naval Reserve on 10 November 1986 and
reported for four years of active duty on 24 December 1986.
record shows that you were advanced to AMH3 (E-4) on 16 November
1989.
evaluation for the period
were assigned marginal marks of 3.2 in the categories of
reliability, military bearing and personal behavior.
also shows that for the period 1 July to 23 December 1990, you
were assigned marginal marks of 3.0 in the categories of
reliability, military bearing and personal behavior and marks of
3.2 in rate knowledge and directing.
The page 9
The
On 23 December 1990 you signed an administrative remarks (page
13) entry acknowledging that you were not recommended for
reenlistment and would be assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code
because of continued substandard performance, a pattern of
misconduct, and a total disregard for authority and Naval
Regulations.
1990 with your service characterized as honorable.
you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
You were released from active duty on 23 December
As indicated
performance
The Board concluded that two consecutive marginal
evaluations and the comments contained in the page 13 entry were
sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment
code.
and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon
request.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
The names
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,
ti. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05094-01
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. July 1990 you were honorably released from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07768-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 14 March 1988. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00085-02
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, an enlisted member of the Naval Reserve filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 7 December 1989. The page 9 shows that in the evaluation for the period ending 7 December 1989, he was assigned marginal marks of 3.0 in the categories of reliability and personal behavior. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08102-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the United States Naval Reserve filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that her record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 26 May 1989. That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that she was not discharged on 20 May 1989 but continued to serve on active duty until 22 September 1989 when she was released from active duty with her...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02987-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. marks assigned for the period 1 February 1992 to 25 July 1992 are not entered on the page 9. In addition, the page 9 clearly shows that you were not eligible for reenlistment on 25 July 1992. that your performance either...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07743-98
In the performance evaluation for You were Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to a diagnosed personality disorder. evaluations and the psychologist's opinion that you could be at risk to harm yourself or others were sufficient to support the decision not to recommend you for reenlistment and to assign you an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02221-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, application on 28 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The execution of all punishment was On 16 December 1985 you were advanced to first class petty officer (E-6) and on 21 July 1986 you extended your enlistment for a period of 27 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9807519
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 7519-98 14 July 1999 Dear
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06122-01
Ms. Humberd, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 29 January 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. d. The enlisted performance record (page 9) shows that in the four evaluations after the NJP Petitioner received no marks below 3.0 in any category and the lowest overall evaluation was 3.2 In the evaluation for the period ending 30 June 1995 he was . The Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02899-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2001. 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. The documentation setting forth the facts and circumstances which led to your discharge are unknown and you have not provided a However, it appears that you...