Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03731-08
Original file (03731-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SJN

Docket No: 03731-08
2 April 2009

 

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 31 March 2009. 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
31 October 2000 at age 18. You served over three years without
incident until 16 August 2004, when you received nonjudicial
punishment (NUP) for an unknown offense.

Based on the information currently contained in your record it
appears that you were only advanced to paygrade E-3. On

30 November 2005, you signed an enlisted evaluation covering the
period from 16 July to 30 November 2005, stating you were
promotable and recommended for retention. However, the report
also stated, in part, that you were an average worker, and needed
constant supervision to ensure satisfactory results for most
assigned task. You were released from active duty and
transferred to the Navy Reserve. At that time you were assigned
a reenlistment code of RE-4.

For Sailors separated at the expiration of their first period of
obligated service, Navy regulations state that professional
growth criteria must be met before they may reenlist.. The
instruction states, in part, as follows:
To satisfy professional growth criteria for the first
reenlistment... the member must be: (1) serving as a petty
officer or, (2) serving in paygrade E-3 having passed an
examination for advancement to paygrade E-4 and be currently
recommended for advancement, or (3) have formerly been a
petty officer in current enlistment and be currently
recommended for advancement to paygrade E-4. Failure to
meet the professional growth criteria may result in denial
of further extensions or reenlistment...

An individual separated in paygrade E-3 who fails to meet the
above criteria may receive a RE-3R reenlistment code if he/she is
recommended for advancement to paygrade E-4 at the time of
separation. If not, the individual must be assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as the NJP for an
unknown offense, your overall record of service, good conduct
medal, and the fact that you were recommended for retention at
the time of your release from active duty. Nevertheless, the
Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a
change in the reenlistment code since the record does not
indicate whether all requirements for retention were
accomplished. In this regard, Navy regulations state, in part,
that although the recommendation means the reporting senior
recommends reenlistment or extension based on performance, it
does not certify that all reenlistment requirements have been
met. Further, the Board believed you received a RE-4 reenlistment
code based on being an average worker and that you required
consent supervision. 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,

  

 

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06642-10

    Original file (06642-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 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. On 23 July 1971, you were released from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3 and not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09092-09

    Original file (09092-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navai Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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 | CY2009 | 03429-09

    Original file (03429-09.pdf) 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. If not, the individual must be assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your period of Satisfactory service. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03837-10

    Original file (03837-10.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 January 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is authorized when an individual is discharged at the expiration of his term of active obligated service...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01181-10

    Original file (01181-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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. On 18 June 1993, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05255-09

    Original file (05255-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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. You were released from active duty on 25 January 1996 and transferred to the Navy Reserve and assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06876-09

    Original file (06876-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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 | CY2010 | 06569-10

    Original file (06569-10.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 March 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. On 18 April 2004, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3, and assigned a reentry code of RE-3R.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08436-07

    Original file (08436-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. The instruction states, in part, as follows: To satisfy professional growth criteria for the first reenlistment...the member must be: (1) serving as a petty officer or, (2) serving in paygrade E-3 having passed an examination for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01236-11

    Original file (01236-11.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 November 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. - Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...