Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07854-05
Original file (07854-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                    2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



SJN
 Docket No: 07854-05
7 March 2006







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 1 March 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 Navy on 16 March 2000. You served for over three years and were advanced to paygrade E-3. However, it appears that you received several performance evaluations during this period in which you were not recommend for retention due to significant problems. The record also shows that an “early out” request was approved. On 15 September 2003 you signed yet another performance evaluation which stated that you were progressing, but ineligible for advancement or retention. On 15 September 2003, you were honorably released from active duty by reason of “reduction in force”. At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your entire period of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated due to an “early out” request and is not recommended for retention. 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09877-07

    Original file (09877-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 August 2008. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated due to an “early out” request and is not recommended for retention. 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 | CY2007 | 06290-07

    Original file (06290-07.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 1 March 2001 at age 18. Additionally, it appears you were not recommended...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07450-06

    Original file (07450-06.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 Navy on 3 June 1999 at age 18. You were honorably released from active duty, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02508-09

    Original file (02508-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 January 2010. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated due to an “early out” request and is not recommended for retention. 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 | CY2008 | 07452-08

    Original file (07452-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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. 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 | CY2007 | 09104-07

    Original file (09104-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 October 2008. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of the adverse discharge evaluation which recommended that you not be allowed to reenlist. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07949-10

    Original file (07949-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2011. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 6 June 2006, your recommendation for advancement was withdrawn due to substandard performance.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04468-06

    Original file (04468-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    04468-06 2 November 2006This 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 31 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable...

  • 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 | CY2006 | 11234-06

    Original file (11234-06.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 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...