Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02456-09
Original file (02456-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

SIN
Docket No: .02456-09
13 January 2010

 

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 12 January 2010. 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 ail material submitted in support.
thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations,

and policies.

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. ;

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

7 April 2004 at age 18. You served without incident for over two
years until 19 May 2006, when you received nonjudicial punishment
(NTP) for disobedience. You received restriction, extra duty,
and a reduction in paygrade. On i April 2008, you signed a
performance evaluation covering the period from 16 July 2007 to

6 April 2008 that did not recommended you for retention. That
evaluation assigned an overall adverse mark of 2.4 and stated, in
part, that although you had made a contribution, your overall
military bearing, personal job accomplishment, initiative and
motivation were unacceptable. Further, it stated that your ©
inability to conform to Navy standards warranted your separation
without a recommendation for reenlistment or retention. On

6 April 2008, you were honorably released from active duty at the
‘expiration of your enlistment. 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 youth and record
of service. 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. 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. 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 ig 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,
\See
. DE FRR
Executive ctor

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2007 | 09104-07

    Original file (09104-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 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 | CY2013 | NR3108 13

    Original file (NR3108 13.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 April 2014. It was also noted on that evaluation that you had received three NJP’s and were 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

    Original file (09514-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 08879-09

    Original file (08879-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2010. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when 4 Sailor is geparated 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 | CY2009 | 07638-09

    Original file (07638-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 2010. On 24 July 2008, you were recommended for administrative separation due to weight control failure. 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 | CY2010 | 04508-09

    Original file (04508-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction cf Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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. 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 | 02275-09

    Original file (02275-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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. Your record contains an enlisted performance evaluation for the period from 16 March 2006 to 15 Mareh 2007 in which you received an overall trait...