DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX TRG
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No: 8306-07
7 May 2008
naval record pursu nt to the Provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.
two performance evaluations for the period 1 April 19909 to 31
March 1992 are adverse. In both evaluations there are comments
concerning your poor leadership skills. After the first adverse
evaluation, you were issued a letter of substandard service. On
adverse performance evaluations and a disciplinary action only
seven days prior to the expiration of your enlistment was
sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
and a change in that code is not warranted.
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
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04344-01
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. November 1988. reenlistment and were assigned an At that time, you were not recommended for RR-4 reenlistment code. The Board concluded that two consecutive adverse performance evaluations were sufficient to support the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05563-01
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. During the period 16 March 1996 to 13 May 1998, you You reenlisted in the Navy on 13 April 1990 for five years and subsequently extended that enlistment on three occasions totaling 39 months. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03932-01
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 | CY2001 | 05311-01
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. clear that you had to significantly improve both your performance of duty and conduct before you could be removed from petty officer quality control and receive a better reenlistment code. performance evaluation and the NJP, were sufficient to support the improvement in your performance, The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03909-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. However, the Board concluded that your reenlistment code was assigned based on your performance during your last year on active duty, and that you were counseled concerning the fact that you were not eligible to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08743-00
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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07379-01
You reenlisted in the Navy on 26 February 1974 for four years in the rate of You then served in an excellent manner for several years. However, the two performance evaluations covering the period 1 October 1976 until 25 February 1978 are adverse and you were not recommended for advancement or retention in the Navy in either evaluation. evaluations indicate that you did not want to be in the Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07450-06
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 | CY2006 | 02467-06
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 enlisted in the Navy on 4 September 2001 at age 18. You have provided a copy of your post...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06765-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 August 2008. On 20 November 1986 you received nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for a failure to go to your appointed place of duty and were reduced to petty officer second class. At that time, you had completed 17 years, 11 months and 10 days of active service.