Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03438-06
Original file (03438-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TRG
                                                                                          Docket No: 3438-06
                                                                                          13 October 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 4 October 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable mate:rial error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Navy for four years on 25 January 1995 at age
20. During the period from 16 January 1996 to 15 January 1998 you received marginal or adverse performance evaluations.
In the evaluation for the period ending 24 January 1999 you were assigned an adverse mark of 1.0 in leadership and marginal marks of 2.0 in several other categories. The evaluation indicates that you were not recommended for retention. On 19 June 1997 you received nonjudicial punishment for insubordination and making provoking speeches or gestures. On 24 January 1999 you acknowledged that you were not recommended for reenlistment and were being assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. You were released from active duty on 24 January 1995 with an honorable characterization of service.

You desire a change in the reenlistment code so that you can enlist in the Army. Nevertheless the Board concluded that your disciplinary record and poor evaluations was sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 Di rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07768-98

    Original file (07768-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 03932-01

    Original file (03932-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You were The Board believed that a record of three consecutive marginal and adverse performance evaluations was sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code, despite the recommendation for retention contained in the last performance evaluation of record. the Board concludes that if a performance evaluation for the period 15 June 1997 until your release from active duty on 6 October 1997 had been available, it would have been adverse. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9807519

    Original file (NC9807519.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 00303-02

    Original file (00303-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, Your allegations of error and injustice were 8 May 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. 13-month period documenting three counselings and problems with your government credit card debt provided sufficient justify- cation for a non-recommendation for retention and assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05094-01

    Original file (05094-01.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. July 1990 you were honorably released from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | CY2006 | 07256-06

    Original file (07256-06.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 21 October 1999 at age 24. On 10 October 2003 you received a substandard...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 08298-01

    Original file (08298-01.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 January 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. reporting to this command member has had 2 larceny convictions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03796-02

    Original file (03796-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. A review In this military bearing/character, and Your record further reflects that you received an adverse special enlisted performance evaluation for the period of 16 June to 12 November 2001 to document the removal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08743-00

    Original file (08743-00.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 June 2001. 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. You believe there was disparate treatment because the chief petty officer only received a punitive letter of reprimand and was retained in the Navy,...