DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
	2 NAVY ANNEX	
	WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 

		SJN
		Docket No. 04468-06
		2 November 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 31 October 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 enlisted in the Navy on 27 January 2000. You served for four years and were advanced to paygrade E-4. Although the record is not complete, it appears that during this period you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a period of unauthorized absence (UA) and dereliction of duty.

On 14 January 2004 you signed a performance evaluation covering the period from 24 September 2003 to 26 January 2004 in which you were not recommended for retention. That evaluation assigned an adverse mark of 1.0 in the marking category of quality of work and military bearing. The evaluation comments stated that you were a “second-rate” performer, could not be relied upon to accomplish tasks without direct supervision, attempted to circumvent command policies for your own benefit, and exhibited minimal effort in your military bearing and personal appearance.

On 26 January 2004, you were honorably released from active duty at the expiration of your enlistment. At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and time in service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code given the NJP and the substandard evaluation. 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. 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