Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01561-07
Original file (01561-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



 SJN
 Docket No: 01561-07
4 December 2007


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 28 November 2007. 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 25 September 1989 at age 19. Based on the information currently contained in your record it appears you served for four years without incident and were advanced to paygrade E-4. Also, it appears that on 20 August 1997, you were honorably released from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment, you were not recommended for retention, and assigned an RE—4 reenlistment code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because you were not recommended for retention. An RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is separated at the expiration of his term of active obligated service 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 | CY2008 | 03278-08

    Original file (03278-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2008. On 19 April 2007 you signed a performance evaluation in which you were not recommended for retention. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated at the expiration of his term of active obligated service and is not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08481-07

    Original file (08481-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2008. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated at the expiration of his term of active obligated service 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 | 03279-07

    Original file (03279-07.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 reenlisted in the Navy on 29 September 2000. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08372-06

    Original file (08372-06.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 19 June 1996 at age 18. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11191-08

    Original file (11191-08.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 October 2009. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is released at the expiration of his term of active obligated service 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08030-06

    Original file (08030-06.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 29 October 2001 at age 20. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08642-09

    Original file (08642-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2010. fn this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is reguired when a Sailor is separated at the expiration of their term of active obligated service 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 | CY2009 | 02456-09

    Original file (02456-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After careful an@ conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code given your 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06714-07

    Original file (06714-07.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 5 March 2002 at age 23. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is...

  • 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...