DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No:
8 August 2001
7428-00
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 7 August 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.
On 28
You enlisted in the Navy on 13 November 1995 at age 18.
June 2000 you received nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of
a controlled substance and disobedience.
The punishment imposed
included forfeitures of pay of $1496 and a reduction in rate to
GM3 (E-4).
In the performance evaluation for the period 29 June
to 12 October 2000, you were assigned adverse marks of 1.0 in the
categories of military bearing/character and teamwork, and were
not recommended for advancement or retention in the Navy.
You
were released from active dutv on 21 November 2000 with your
service characterized as honorable.
recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an
reenlistment code.
you were not
RE-4
At that time
You state in your application, in effect, that an
discharge board recommended your retention in the
consequently, you should have been recommended for reenlistment.
The ADB is not filed in your record and the reason you were
recommended for retention is unknown.
administrative
Navy and,
The Board concluded that the nonjudicial punishment for drug
abuse and the final adverse performance evaluation 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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
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 | 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 | CY2006 | 00494-06
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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 26 June 1998 at age 18. In the evaluation for the period ending 11...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02258-09
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 existence of probable...
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 | 03932-01
You were The Board believed that a record of three consecutive marginal and adverse performance evaluations was sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code, despite the recommendation for retention contained in the last performance evaluation of record. the Board concludes that if a performance evaluation for the period 15 June 1997 until your release from active duty on 6 October 1997 had been available, it would have been adverse. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07334-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 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. The Board concluded that a record, which included a disciplinary action and adverse performance evaluations was sufficient to support the assignment...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 03029-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2000. 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. You have submitted evidence showing that the In support of your case you have submitted Apparently, this The Board concluded that a record of three...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05311-01
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. clear that you had to significantly improve both your performance of duty and conduct before you could be removed from petty officer quality control and receive a better reenlistment code. performance evaluation and the NJP, were sufficient to support the improvement in your performance, The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09632-02
A three-member panel o$ the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2003. Although the documents concerning your separation processing are not contained in your records, it is clear that you were processed for separation by reason of fraudulent entry due to your failure to disclose pre-service medical treatment and diagnosed personality disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...