DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
TIR
Docket No: 9553-09
16 July 2010
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 13 July 2010. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
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 26 October 1998 at age 19 and served
for about three years and four months without disciplinary
incident. However, your record contains an administrative
remarks entry dated 27 February 2002 which reflects that you were
counselled regarding your deficiencies in performance and
conduct, specifically, absence from your appointed place of duty
and dereliction of duty. On 2 May 2002 you received nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) for failure to obey a lawful order, absence from
your appointed place of duty, making a false official statement,
and an unauthorized pass offense. The punishment imposed was
reduction to paygrade E-3, restriction and extra duty for 45
days, and a $1,380.50 forfeiture of pay.
Your record contains a separation enlisted performance evaluation
for the period ending 25 September 2002 in which you received an
overall trait average (OTA) of 2.29. The reporting senior
stated, in part, that your military bearing, motivation, and
dedication placed you as a below average performer with
Significant problems. It was also stated that you had received
NIP, failed the final physical readiness test cycle, and were not
recommended for advancement or retention. On 21 October 2002 you
were again advised that you were not recommended for reenlistment
due to your reduction in rate and nonrecommendation for
retention.
On 25 October 2002, upon completion of your required active
service, you were honorably released from active duty and
transferred to the Navy Reserve. You were not recommended for
retention or reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code. On 10 December 2002, at the expiration of your enlistment,
you were honorably discharged.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, period of satisfactory service, and desire to change
your reenlistment code so that you may reenlist. It also
considered your assertion of a personal conflict with one of your
superiors. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code
because the nonrecommendation for reenlistment was sufficient to
Support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code, which is
authorized by regulatory guidance. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.
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,
W. DEAN R
Executive er
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02275-09
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06134-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10727-09
A three-member panel of the Board ‘for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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 | CY2007 | 06323-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The reporting senior stated, in part, as follows: (Member) requires direct supervision to get satisfactory results.... he takes no ownership of any actions and constantly makes excuses for his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11182-06
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 Naval Reserve on 23 August 2002 at age 22 and began a period of active duty on 20...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06496-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 June 2010. At that time you were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | 03173-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 March 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 | 04001-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 March 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 | CY2007 | 06382-07
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. December 1984 to 3 May 1985, which was submitted on the occasion of your separation, states that you were not recommended for advancement or retention due to an increase in your weight physical qualifications. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07418-05
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 Naval Reserve and began a period of active duty on 19 January 2000, and served...