DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN
Docket No: 03278-08
29 April 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 23 April 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 18 December 2002. You served for
five years and were advanced to paygrade E-5.
On 19 April 2007 you signed a performance evaluation in which you
were not recommended for retention. That evaluation assigned an
adverse mark of 2.0 in the marking category of military bearing.
The evaluation comments state, in part, that you received a
counseling warning for disrespect toward superiors, your
difficulty to adapt to a military lifestyle, and poor
performance. You were not recommended for retention.
On 17 December 2007, you were honorably discharged from active
duty at the expiration of your enlistment with a narrative reason
of “non-retention on active duty.” 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 entire record of
service, including your Good Conduct medal, and the reasons you
were not permitted to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to remove your
enlisted evaluation covering the period from 1 June 2006 to 15
March 2007 from your official records, or warrant a change. in the
reenlistment code. 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. Additionally, under the circumstances of your case,
the code is required when the narrative reason for separation is
“non-retention on active duty.” 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,
igh
W. DI
Executive Dar
~
NO
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02456-09
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 | 08481-07
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 | CY2005 | 09514-05
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 | 09104-07
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 | CY2009 | 08642-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2010. fn this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is reguired when a Sailor is separated at the expiration of their 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 | CY2007 | 09610-07
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 | CY2014 | NR3047 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2014. 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. In this regard, an RE-3C reentry code is authorized when a Marine is ‘discharged at the expiration of their term of active obligated service and is not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08372-06
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 19 June 1996 at age 18. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03279-07
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 | CY2007 | 07250-07
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.On 25 April 2001, you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. Regulations also direct assignment of an RE-4...