DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SJUN
Docket No: 04795-13
12 July 2013
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 9 July 2013. 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 6 April 2001 after serving over
five years of honorable service. On 21 September 2011, you
signed an enlisted evaluation covering the period from
16 September 2010 to 15 September 2011 that stated, in part, that
you were not committed to improve yourself, you could not be
relied upon to follow through, routinely made excuses for poor
performance instead of accepting personal responsibility, were a
poor communicator, and your work performance had become
unacceptable. Finally, you had significant problems and were not
recommended for retention. You remained on active duty until
30 September 2011, when you were honorably discharged from active
duty at the completion of your required active service. At that
time, you were assigned an RE-4 reentry code.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your prior honorable
service, the reason you were not permitted to reenlist, and
contention that you were improperly discharged. Nevertheless,
the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant
reinstatement in the Navy or changing your RE-4 reentry code. In
this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is required when a Sailor is
separated at the expiration of her term of active obligated
service and is not recommended for retention. With regard
to your contention, Navy directives state, in part, that the
Petty Officer Quality Control Program was to provide oversight of
career petty officers with identified performance or behavior
deficiencies, provide guidance to improve those deficiencies, and
to monitor their performance for improvement. This oversight
function was delegated to unit commanding officers (CO). A
thorough review of your official military records fails to show
that you were ever placed in or the subject of a Petty Officer
Quality Control Program. You simply received an honorable
discharge at the completion of your required service and were not
recommended for reenlistment. 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 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,
iS Sean
W. Se eo
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05311-01
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. clear that you had to significantly improve both your performance of duty and conduct before you could be removed from petty officer quality control and receive a better reenlistment code. performance evaluation and the NJP, were sufficient to support the improvement in your performance, The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 09391-97
The record also shows that during the period from 1 April 1986 to 30 November 1987 you received two consecutive adverse performance In the second evaluation for the period 1 April to evaluations. You were honorably discharged on 1 May 1990 However, you were assigned duties outside At that time you In reaching its decision the Board noted your disciplinary record, adverse performance evaluations and the fact that you elected separation prior to removal from quality control. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05911-02
At that time he was recommended for The reporting senior stated that . He also notes that his last enlisted performance evaluation recommended him for advancement and retention. The Board reaches this conclusion even Petitioner was recommended for advancement Furthermore, in both of 3 The Board further notes the letter of substandard service and its requirements for avoiding the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code upon separation, specifically, that the individual request an extension...
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 | 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 02426-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 November 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. On 15 September 1994, while you were serving in paygrade E-2, you were honorably released from active duty, transferred to the inactive Navy...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06569-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 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. On 18 April 2004, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3, and assigned a reentry code of RE-3R.
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 | CY2006 | 07482-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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. During the period from 15 June 2001 to 15 June 2002 you received a series of adverse performance evaluations from different raters and reporting seniors.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03837-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your ~ application on 26 January 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reentry code is authorized when an individual is discharged at the expiration of his term of active obligated service...