Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03279-07
Original file (03279-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                           2 NAVY ANNEX
          W ASHINGTON DC  
        




SJN
 Docket No: 03279-07
13 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 5 December 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 29 September 2000. You served for six years without incident and were advanced to paygrade E-5.
On 8 August 2006, you signed a performance evaluation in which you were not recommended for retention.. That evaluation assigned an adverse mark of 1.0 in the marking category of military bearing. The evaluation comments state you failed three consecutive physical fitness assessments.
On 28 September 2006, you were honorably discharged from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment. 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 overall record of service and the underlying reason you were probably not permitted to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because of the adverse discharge evaluation
 which recommended that you not be allowed to reenlist. 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. Further, under the circumstances of your case, the Board noted that at the completion of your prior service that ended on 1 May 1996 you received an RE-4 reenlistment code that was later upgraded by this Board to RE-3F. The Board concluded that you were already allowed to overcome your weight problem while in the service and were later given an RE code change to allow you an opportunity to demonstrate you had conquered your weight problem. 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 09610-07

    Original file (09610-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 November 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...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 05569-01

    Original file (05569-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | 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 | CY2005 | 09514-05

    Original file (09514-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2006. 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 | 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.