DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 7633-09.
17 November 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 30 September 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 22 May 2001. On
13 July 2006 you received nonjudicial punishment for an
unauthorized absence. You were honorably released from active
duty on 21 May 2007 and transferred to the Navy Reserve. You
were assigned a reentry code of RE-4 to indicate that you were
not eligible for reenlistment.
A Sailor must be recommended for advancement and retention in his
last two graded evaluations in order to be eligible for
reenlistment. Since you were not recommended for advancement or
retention in your next to last graded evaluation, which covers
the period of 16 June 2005 to 13 July 2006, you were not eligible
for reenlistment. As you have not demonstrated that your reentry
code is erroneous or unjust, the Board concluded that there is no
basis for changing it, and denied your application. 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,
Dye
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09177-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations. Since you were not recommended for advancement or retention in your next to last graded evaluation which covers the 21 July 2005 to 15 July 2006 period, you were not eligible for reenlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05850-01
A You were marked 3.0 ("meets The reporting senior noted The evaluation for the period ending 15 July 2000 showed you were now promotable and meeting standards in all categories. discharged from your second enlistment, you had not advanced Therefore, you met the criteria for reenlistment when For the first reenlistment, an However, at the time you were 2 Since you The Board found beyond E-3 and were not recommended for advancement. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01516-05
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 27 June 2000 at age 21. In the last enlisted performance evaluation of 26...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00887-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 October 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 | 09858-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.21 June 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reentry code given your SCM conviction of serious...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09194-09
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 were honorably released from active duty on 25 July 2006, and assigned a reentry code of RE-4. 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 | 08477-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.13 May 2009. 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 | CY2006 | 06436-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 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 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 08513-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 April 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 probable...