DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
S
TJR
Docket No: 5094-01
15 January 2002
Dear
v
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552.
,January 2002.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 8
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
to,the proceedings of this
regulations and procedures applicable
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Your record reflects that you served for a year and
The Board found you enlisted in the Navy on 2 July 1986 at the
age of 18.
10 months without disciplinary incident but on 4 May 1988 you
received nonjudicial punishment
(NJP) for theft and were awarded
a reduction in paygrade, $400 forfeiture of pay, and restriction
and extra duty for 15 days.
During the reporting period of 16 January to 1 July 1990 you
received adverse marks of 2.8 in the marking categories of
reliability and personal behavior.
assigned in the category of military bearing.
evaluation was a marginal 3.2
A marginal mark of 3.0 was
The overall
Your record contains an administrative remarks entry dated 15
June 1990 which notes that due to the nonrecommendation of your
commanding officer, you were not eligible for reenlistment.
July 1990 you were honorably released from active duty at the
expiration of your enlistment and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code.
On 24 January 1994, upon completion of your obligation
service, you were honorably discharged.
On 1
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and immaturity and your contention that there is no
reason for the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code.
the Board concluded these factors and contention were not
sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because
of the serious nature of your misconduct which resulted in NJP,
your marginal performance during the last six months of your
enlistment, and the nonrecommendation for reenlistment by your
commanding officer.
an individual is separated at the expiration of his term of
active obligated service and is not recommended for reenlistment.
Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded
An RE-4 reenlistment code is required when
However,
your reenlistment code was proper as issued and no change is
warranted.
Accordingly, 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.
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 | CY2006 | 08030-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 29 October 2001 at age 20. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...
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 | 02930-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2003. 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 instruction states, in part, as follows: To satisfy professional growth criteria for the first reenlistment (including first enlistment in...
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 | CY2006 | 08372-06
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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 19 June 1996 at age 18. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05950-01
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. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00214-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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. Board found that these factors were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service on release from active duty, given your disciplinary record and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05563-01
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. During the period 16 March 1996 to 13 May 1998, you You reenlisted in the Navy on 13 April 1990 for five years and subsequently extended that enlistment on three occasions totaling 39 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
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 | 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...