Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11698-10
Original file (11698-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TJUR
Docket No: 11698-10
30 August 2011

 

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 30 August 2011. 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 16 June 2005 at age 18 and began a
period of active duty on 12 January 2006. Although you served
without disciplinary incident, during the period from January
through April 2006, you were repeatedly counselled and warned of
administrative separation due to deficiencies in your performance
and unsatisfactory conduct and/or behavior, specifically, your
failure to meet minimum physical fitness assessment (PFA)
standards.

Subsequently, you were recommended for an expeditious
administrative separation after nine attempts, to no avail, to
meet your PFA standards and your lack of motivation. As a
result, on 12 April 2006, you were notified of pending
administrative separation by reason of performance and conduct.
At that time you did not object to the separation and waived your
right to submit a rebuttal statement to the aforementioned
notification. Subsequently, the separation authority directed an
uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of performance
and conduct, and on 20 April 2006 you were so separated and
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code,

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your reenlistment code. Further, the Board concluded that
your substandard performance was sufficient to support the

assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Finally, such a code is
normally assigned to Sailors who are separated due to their

failure to complete recruit training. Accordingly, your
application has been denied.

The Board suggested that you may wish to apply for a waiver of
your RE-4 reenlistment code with branches of the armed forces
other than the Navy.

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,

\o Roan !
W. DEAN E F

Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11116-06

    Original file (11116-06.rtf) 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.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 7 February 2006 at age 21 and served without disciplinary incident.While...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00352-11

    Original file (00352-11.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code because of your misconduct, which resulted in NUP, deficiencies in your performance, continuous failing of physical fitness tests, and the nonrecommendation for retention; all...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08513-10

    Original file (08513-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09622-07

    Original file (09622-07.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded this factor wags not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code due to your failure to meet the Navy’s PFA requirements. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized when an individual fails his fourth PFA in a four year period.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10131-08

    Original file (10131-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to the reason for your discharge or reenlistment code...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07452-08

    Original file (07452-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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 | 00244-06

    Original file (00244-06.rtf) 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.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 enlisted in the Navy on 29 August 2005 at age 18. On 28 November 2005, the separation...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01859-11

    Original file (01859-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 2011. On your last enlisted evaluation report it was noted that you failed three Physical Fitness Assessments (PFA) within a four year period and were not recommended for retention in the Navy. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04036-09

    Original file (04036-09.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. As a result, on 21 June 2007, at the expiration of your enlistment, you were honorably discharged by reason of nonretention on active duty and were assigned an RE-3M reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06424-08

    Original file (06424-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 April 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...