DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
BUG
Docket No: 7949-10
6 April 2011
cree?
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.
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 5 April 2011. 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.
You entered active duty in the Navy on 19 June 1998. On 28 May
2003, you were counseled and warned that failure to comply with
body composition standards could result in administrative
separation processing. On 15 May 2004, you were counseled and
warned regarding your intentional failure of an advancement
examination. On 6 June 2006, your recommendation for
advancement was withdrawn due to substandard performance. You
received two adverse performance evaluations in which you were
not recommended for retention. On 19 June 2006, you were
honorably discharged due to non-retention on active duty, and
were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment)
reentry code.
In its review of your application, the Board carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your current desire
to serve in the armed forces. However, the Board concluded
that you were correctly assigned the RE-4 reentry code due to
your weight issues, substandard performance, and non-
recommendation for retention. In view of the above, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
¥ = if
Its te-vegretted.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 gf regularity attaches to all 6fficial
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08475-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your desire to change...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09424-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. In this regard, you did not appeal your NUPs or submit rebuttal statements to your substandard performance evaluations.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 01912-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Cor ection of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, co sidered your application on 11 August 1999. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all materqal 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 | 11698-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 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. Subsequently, the separation authority directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of performance and conduct, and on 20 April...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03278-08
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 | CY2011 | 01312-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 2011. However, the Board concluded that you were correctly assigned an RE-4 reentry code due to your physical readiness issues and non-recommendation 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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07450-06
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 3 June 1999 at age 18. You were honorably released from active duty, and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07768-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 14 March 1988. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5819 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2014. On 30 September 2011, you received an honorable characterization of service at the end of your enlistment, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) reentry 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.