DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 2529-02
23 August 2002
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 20 August 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.
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.
You graduated from Class A school on 3 March 1989.
You then served without incident for more than two years.
You enlisted in the Navy on 18 August 1986 for four years at age
18.
During this period on 22 November 1988 you began Hospital
Corpsman Class A School.
nonjudicial punishment for failing to go to your appointed place
of duty.
About six weeks later, on 16 April 1989, you were advanced to
In the performance evaluation for the
hospitalman (HN; E-3).
period 1 February to 17 August 1990 you were assigned marks of
4.0 in every category and were recommended for reenlistment.
were released from active duty on 17 August 1990 as an HN with
your service characterized as honorable.
Subsequently, you were
assigned an RE-3R reenlistment code.
issued an honorable discharge at the expiration of your military
obligation.
On 28 February 1989 you received
You
At that time, you were
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-3R when an individual
is recommended for reenlistment but has not met the professional
growth requirement
tb at least pass an advancement examination
The Board noted that
for petty officer third class (HM3; E-4).
you were not advanced to HN until 16 April 1989, which did not
allow you much time to be advanced to HM3 prior to your release
An RE-3R reenlistment code is not considered
from active duty.
to be derogatory and means that you are recommended for a
probationary reenlistment during which you must advance to petty
officer to be eligible for further service.
treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board
could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of the
3R reenlistment code.
Since you have been
RE-
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
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 | CY2004 | 07915-04
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 22 July 1998 and then served without incident for almost six years. ...
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 | CY2002 | 03581-02
growth criteria, officer third class, be serving in examination for advancement to recommended for advancement, officer in the current enlistment and be currently recommended for advancement to CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable It appears to the Board that Petitioner was issued an action. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 08198-04
The Board, consisting of Mr. Leeman, Mr. Pfeiffer and Ms. McCormick, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 16 August 2005 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Petitioner subsequently enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve, On 14 September 2001 he reported for active duty and served for one year. Therefore, Petitioner’s record should be corrected to show that on 11...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03429-09
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. If not, the individual must be assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your period of Satisfactory service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01181-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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. On 18 June 1993, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02905-10
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS . The Board, consisting of Messrs reviewed Petitioner's May 2010 and, pursuan corrective action indicated below should be cake available evidence of record. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 18 April 1992, she was assigned a reentry code of RE-3R.
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501045
ND05-01045 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050606. The Commanding Officers. Appeal denied 031103.031008: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge with the least favorable characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions by reason of commission of a serious offense-misconduct.031008: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08436-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The instruction states, in part, as follows: To satisfy professional growth criteria for the first reenlistment...the member must be: (1) serving as a petty officer or, (2) serving in paygrade E-3 having passed an examination for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07859-05
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 25 January 1990 at age 19. If not, the individual must be assigned a RE-4...