Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR0193 14
Original file (NR0193 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

707 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

BC
Docket No: 00193-14
24 July 2014

 

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 i552.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 23 July 2014. 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 subniitted 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 20 May 1987. You completed your
obligated service honorably. However, as you were never
promoted above pay grade E-3, you were released from active duty
on 18 May 1990, with an honorable characterization of service.
You were assigned an RE-3R (not meeting the professional growth
criteria) reentry code.

The Board found that RE- 3R is the most favorable reentry ‘code
authorized when a Sailor is discharged at the expiration of his
term of active obligated service and has failed to meet
professional growth criteria as in your case. The alternative
code is an RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) reentry code.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the pane? 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,

Set

ROBERT D>~ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01181-10

    Original file (01181-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 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. On 18 June 1993, you were honorably discharged from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06569-10

    Original file (06569-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2013 | NR793 13

    Original file (NR793 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2014. 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 | CY2013 | NR8209 13

    Original file (NR8209 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2014. 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 found that RE-3R is the most favorable reentry code authorized when a Sailor is discharged at the expiration of his term of active...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03837-10

    Original file (03837-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR2540-13

    Original file (NR2540-13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 7015S. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2014. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reentry code given your NJP, and the fact that you received a reentry code authorized by regulations.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00171 12

    Original file (00171 12.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. An individual separated in paygrade E-3 who fails to meet the above criteria may receive an RE-3R reenlistment code if he/she is recommended for advancement to paygrade E-4 at the time of separation. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4679 13

    Original file (NR4679 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting a change in his RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) reentry code, which was issued on 13 April 2013. At that time he was recommended for promotion and continued service in the Navy Reserve, and assigned an RE-4 reentry code. Such a code may also be assigned if the commanding officer does not recommend the individual for reenlistment.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06642-10

    Original file (06642-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 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 23 July 1971, you were released from active duty while serving in pay grade E-3 and not recommended for retention.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12763-09

    Original file (12763-09.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. In this regard, you were assigned the most favorable reenlistment code based on your circumstances. 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.