DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOP CORRECTION OF NAVAL PECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
	           WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100	

		CRS
		Docket No: 09514-05
		9 May 2006

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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 May 2006. 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 Naval Reserve on 14 April 2002 for two years after more than 13 years of active service. At that time you were serving in paygrade E-5.

On 12 April 2002 you signed a performance evaluation in which you were not recommended for retention. The evaluation also assigned you an adverse mark of 1.0 in the marking categories of military bearing, personal job accomplishment, teamwork and leadership. The written comments state that your inability to cope with or tolerate the stress in your personal life, coupled with your alcohol rehabilitation failure, had negatively affected your leadership effectiveness and prevented you from properly directing and motivating your subordinates. You were not recommended f or retention.

On 26 April 2002, you were honorably discharged at the expiration of your enlistment with a narrative reason of “completion of required active service,” with an RE-4 reenlistment code. At that time, you had over 15 years of active service.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your entire period of service and the reason you were not permitted to reenlist. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code. lEn this regard, the Board concluded that the adverse marks and comments in your last evaluation provided a sufficient basis for the non- recommendation for reenlistment. 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. 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,

W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

2