DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 2987-02
13 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 6 August 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
your application,
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
together.with all material submitted in support
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 enlisted in the Navy on 24 October 1988 at age 18.
date of your enlistment until 1 February 1991, you served in an
The
excellent manner with no marks in any category below 3.8.
Enlisted Performance Record (page 9) shows that in the evaluation
for the period 1 February 1991 to 31 January 1992 you were
assigned marginal marks of 3.2 in the categories of reliability
and military bearing.
indicates that you were not recommended for advancement.
marks assigned for the period 1 February 1992 to 25 July 1992 are
not entered on the page 9.
July 1992, indicates that you were not eligible for reenlistment.
A page 9 entry, dated 31 January 1992,
However, a page 9 entry, dated 25
From the
The
You were released from active duty in pay grade E-3 on 25 July
1992 with your service characterized as honorable.
you were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an
RE-4 reenlistment code.
Subsequently, you were issued an
honorable discharge at the end of your military obligation.
At that time,
You state in your
last performance evaluation.
You point out that you had an
excellent record, and the unwarranted RE-4 reenlistment code
ap‘plication that you do not have a copy of your
could cause a problem if you attempt to enter an ROTC program.
Although the last performance evaluation is unavailable, the
Board noted the reduction in the quality of your service, as
documented in the evaluation for the period ending 31 January
1992, and that you were not recommended for advancement at that
time.
In addition, the page 9 clearly shows that you were not
eligible for reenlistment on 25 July 1992.
that your performance either stayed at the same level documented
in the 31 January 1992 evaluation, or continued to decline.
Board thus concluded that the available records support the
assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code.
Therefore, it appears
The
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
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.
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 | CY1999 | 07974-97
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 1993. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. After an evaluation, the diagnosis was personality." The Board also noted the comments by the CO in which he stated that you attempted suicide in 1987 and again in 1990, and on 16 April 1992 you stated that you were going to...
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 | 07478-01
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. Both the forfeitures and reduction were A 25 March 1992 Court However, the On the A page 9 entry shows that you were assigned adverse marks of 2.6 in military bearing and personal behavior for the reporting period 1 February to 16 October 1992, and you were not recommended for reenlistment. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05569-01
At that time you were assigned an RR-4 You state in your application that since discharge you have attended weight management and nutrition courses and are now within weight standards. Finally, the Board noted the adverse marks in two categories in the last performance evaluation and The Board that you were not recommended for advancement. believed that despite the excellent comments concerning your performance of duty, the adverse marks and comments meant that a recommendation for...
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 | CY2001 | 08083-00
1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the United States 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 17 July 1992. Beckett, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 2 October 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06726-01
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 Navy filed an application with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better reenlistment code than the RE-4 code assigned on 28 December 1995. Pfeiffer, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 6 November 2001 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08227-00
1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval r'tcord From: To: Subj: Ref: Encl: Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected to show a better reenlistment assigned on 13 January 1995. c'ode then the RE-4 reenlistment code th'a United States Navy filed enclosure The Board, consisting of Mr. 2. An a'ferage was 3.7, but it does not The page 9 indicates g- Petitioner...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09405-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2003. On dated 27 November 1992, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were honorably discharged and were 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 error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01912-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Cor ection of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, co sidered your application on 11 August 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materqal 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...