Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09104-07
Original file (09104-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

SIN
Docket No: 09104-07
3 November 2008

 

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 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 and began a period of active duty on

27 January 2003 at age 22. You served for four years and were
advanced to paygrade E-4. On 22 December 2006 you received and
signed a substandard performance evaluation in which you were not
recommended for retention. Your commanding officer stated, in
part, that your lack of initiative coupled with your
lackadaisical attitude prevented him from recommending you for
retention or advancement. This evaluation assigned an adverse
overall rating of 2.4 with adverse marks of 2.0 in some marking
categories. On 26 January 2007, you were honorably released from
active duty at the expiration of your enlistment and transferred
to the Navy Reserve. At that time, you were assigned a 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. 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. In this regard, an RE-4
reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is separated at the
expiration of her term of active obligated service and is not
recommended for reenlistment. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2006 | 04468-06

    Original file (04468-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    04468-06 2 November 2006This 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 31 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable...

  • 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 | CY2008 | 07014-08

    Original file (07014-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2009. You reenlisted in the Navy on 22 March 2001 after six years of honorable service. 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.