DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2037O~5 100

SJN
Docket No: 05893-07
19 June 2008

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 17 June 2008. 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 30 June 1999 at age 17. On 15 March 2001, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for altering an identification card. You received a forfeiture of pay and a suspended reduction in paygrade.

Based on the information currently contained in your record it appears you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. It also appears that when notified of this action, you waived the right to present your case to an administrative discharge board (ADB) On 23 February 2007 you were discharged under honorable conditions. At that time, you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record for service. Nevertheless, the Board condluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code, which appears to be based on the civil conviction. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is
required when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a discharge under other than honorable conditions is often directed when an individual is discharged for misconduct. 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,

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

2