Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07418-05
Original file (07418-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370~5 1 00

 TJR
 Docket No: 7418-05
11 May 2006







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.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. Your allegations of error and 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.
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 Naval Reserve and began a period of active duty on 19 January 2000, and served without disciplinary incident.
Your record contains a performance evaluation for the period from 1 March to 15 July 2001 which states that you were not recommended for retention due to failure of a physical readiness test. Another performance evaluation for the period from 14 December 2002 to 22 December 2003 was specially issued to document your substandard performance and nonrecommendation for retention.
On 13 January 2004 you received a regular performance evaluation for the period from 14 December 2002 to 22 December 2003 with an overall trait average of 2.29. This performance evaluation stated, in part, as follows:
















 (Member) fails to live up to the Navy Core Values despite continuous counselling and direction..., has been unable to correct her financial situations..., continues to receive letters in regard to nonsufficient funds checks and failure to pay just debts..., retention not recommended
On 18 January 2004, while serving in paygrade E-4, you were honorably released from active duty upon completion of your required active duty. At that time you were not recommended for reenlistment due to your substandard performance and failure to pay just debts. At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, period of honorable service, and your desire to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of your substandard performance which resulted in your nonrecommendation for reenlistment. Finally, such a code is required when a Sailor is not recommended for retention and/or reenlistment. 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 PFIEFFER
         Executive Director
2

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08558-00

    Original file (08558-00.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2001. Your performance evaluation for the period from 1 December 1987 to 13 April 1988 reflects a nonrecommendation for continued service or reenlistment because you were not a positive contributor to the Navy. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code given your substandard performance and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02425-07

    Original file (02425-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 3 June 2003 with about four years of active service on a prior...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06323-07

    Original file (06323-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The reporting senior stated, in part, as follows: (Member) requires direct supervision to get satisfactory results.... he takes no ownership of any actions and constantly makes excuses for his...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06382-07

    Original file (06382-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. December 1984 to 3 May 1985, which was submitted on the occasion of your separation, states that you were not recommended for advancement or retention due to an increase in your weight physical qualifications. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00920-08

    Original file (00920-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2008. 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 | CY2006 | 03755-06

    Original file (03755-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Naval Reserve and began a period of active duty on 27 January 1983. However, 364...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07471-09

    Original file (07471-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 June 2010. Finally, Marines with a record of misconduct, substandard performance, and failure to pay just debts normally receive discharges under other than honorable conditions, and as such, the Board noted that you were fortunate to receive a general characterization of service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06134-10

    Original file (06134-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. 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 | CY2008 | 09424-08

    Original file (09424-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2009. 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. In this regard, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08879-08

    Original file (08879-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 2009. 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, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your period of...