DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV
Y
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 7379-01
21 March 200 2
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 19 March 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.
AZC (E-7).
You reenlisted in the Navy on 26 February 1974 for four years in
the rate of
You then served in an excellent manner
for several years.
However, the two performance evaluations
covering the period 1 October 1976 until 25 February 1978 are
adverse and you were not recommended for advancement or retention
in the Navy in either evaluation.
evaluation state, in part, as follows:
The comments in the first
.
.
.
. Unfortunately the lack of team spirit negative
.
approach to established Navy policy and open criticisms
have been detrimental to command goals and standards.
. Potentially ratee is not a good risk for he has
.
pointedly espoused his dislike for Navy regimentation
and its way of life.
talented individual finds the Navy so distasteful,
however, he rates his opinion and is respected for it.
But consequently a positive recommendation for
advancement or retention in the Naval service must be
withheld.
It is a shame that such a
’
The comments in the second evaluation state, in part, as follows:
.
. overall lack of initiative in all areas other than
.
that directly associated with his assigned
administrative duties reflects his negative viewpoint
towards military life.
Continued reminders and orders
by seniors go unheeded. . . . . unable to demonstrate the
initiative, resourcefulness, or leadership
.I.e_ .
characteristics necessary in today's Navy while
(He) is
actively pursuing his own personal objectives.
not recommended for advancement or retention.
You were honorably discharged at the expiration of your
enlistment on 25 February 1978 and were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.
of active service.
At that time you had completed over 13 years
You state in your application that you need a change in the
reenlistment code so that you can enlist in the National Guard
and serve until you are eligible to retire.
you have earned a masters degree in social work and have
submitted evidence showing that you are employed by the State of
Virginia as a clinical social worker.
You also state that
In order to qualify for reserve retirement at age 60, an
individual must have 20 qualifying years of service, the last
eight of which must be in the reserve component.
born on 11 May 1945 and are now 56 years old, it does not appear
that you can qualify for any form of military retirement even if
the 13 years of active service is considered.
Since you were
Given your excellent service prior to the last two performance
evaluations, it is clear that you knew how to be successful in
the military.
evaluations indicate that you did not want to be in the Navy.
The Board concluded that two consecutive adverse performance
evaluations were sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4
reenlistment code.
Therefore, the last two adverse performance
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
2
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
II-eC
,.
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06265-98
advanced to SK3 (E-4) on 16 June 1977. enlistment, you completed an alcohol rehabilitation program. The performance evaluation for the period 19 On 11 September 1981 you were again counseled concerning your abuse of alcohol. days later your recommendation for advancement was formally withdrawn because of a lack of professional and military skills and alcohol abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06028-00
As reflected in enclosure record as he requested, but modified it by removing the following RS verbiage: qualified for promotion at this time but.. mark in item 19 from “NA” to “yes.” .” Also, as shown in enclosure (2), the HQMC PERB did not remove this report from Petitioner ’s “He is not (3), they changed the g* The fifth contested fitness report, for 28 June to 20 July 1985 (Tab E), from a third RS, also documents only that the following be deleted from the RS comments: Petitioner Is...
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 | CY2001 | 04344-01
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. November 1988. reenlistment and were assigned an At that time, you were not recommended for RR-4 reenlistment code. The Board concluded that two consecutive adverse performance evaluations were sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02015-03
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 next evaluation for the period 16 March to 10 November 2000 is also adverse in that you were not recommended for promotion or retention in the Navy. You state in your application, in effect, that your performance of duty was excellent and your undiagnosed medical condition should not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11234-06
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 reenlisted in the Navy on 5 February 1982 for six years. However, the next two evaluations...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06696-02
Although the enlisted performance board initially recommended discharge, this decision was changed after you submitted evidence that you had met the weight standards. The fitness report for the period 13 September 1986 to 14 February 1987 states as follows:(He) is leaving the Marine Corps after nineteen years of dedicated service, including an extended tour in the Republic of Vietnam. Consequently, the Board concluded that a correction to your record to show that you retired from the...
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 | 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 | CY2002 | 07475-01
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. The other Sailor admitted to assaulting a You and another Sailor were charged with On 21 October 1980 the On 3 November 1980 the Chief of Naval Personnel advised the command that it planned to take no separation action on the foregoing matter. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...