DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TJR
Docket No: 8044-07
3 October 2008
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 1 October 2008. 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 17 August 2005 at age 18. While in
recruit training, during the period from 4 to 21 September 2005,
you were repeatedly counselled and warned regarding deficiencies
in your performance and unsatisfactory conduct and/or behavior,
specifically, your failure to adapt to a military environment,
substandard performance, and overall lack of military bearing and
motivation. As a result of your substandard performance, you
were recommended for an administrative separation.
On 20 September 2005 you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of performance and conduct. At that time
you did not object to the separation and waived your right to
submit a rebuttal statement to the aforementioned notification.
Subsequently, you were recommended for separation by reason of
performance and conduct. The separation authority approved this
recommendation and directed an uncharacterized entry level
separation by reason of performance and conduct. On 12 October
2005 you were so separated and 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 and desire to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your reenlistment code. Further, the Board concluded that
your substandard performance was sufficient to support the
assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Finally, such a code is
authorized by regulatory guidance and normally assigned to
Sailors who are separated due to their failure to complete
recruit training. 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 PFI
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10877-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 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 | CY2009 | 02293-09
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. that your substandard performance was sufficient to support both narrative reason and assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden ig on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00645-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 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 | CY2009 | 06479-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 June 2010. 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 | 06323-07
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 | 04906-07
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11698-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 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. Subsequently, the separation authority directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of performance and conduct, and on 20 April...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12297-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. 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 | CY2005 | 00601-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 2005. 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 | CY2008 | 01339-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...