DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y ANNEX
W A S H I N G T O N DC 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 1227-01
8 March 2001
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 7 March 2001. 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 4 August 1999 at
age 19. The record reflects that on 1 November 2000 you received
nonjudicial punishment for unauthorized absences totalling 355
days.
On 28 November 2000 the commanding officer recommended that you
be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. When informed
of the recommendation, you elected to waive your right to present
your case to an administrative discharge board. After review by
the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was
approved and you were discharged with an other than honorable
discharge on 5 December 2000. At that time you were assigned a
reenlistment code of RE-4.
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. Since you
have been treated no differently than others in your situation,
the Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment
of your reenlistment code. ~ccordingly, your application has
been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.
The Board did not consider whether your characterization of
service should be changed, since you did not ask for such
consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative
remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB).
You may apply to NDRB by submitting the attached DD Form 293.
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
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02926-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2002. 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 | CY2002 | 04234-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2002. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. 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 | CY2002 | 09632-02
A three-member panel o$ the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2003. Although the documents concerning your separation processing are not contained in your records, it is clear that you were processed for separation by reason of fraudulent entry due to your failure to disclose pre-service medical treatment and diagnosed personality disorder. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07992-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2003. As a result of this hospitalization, a psychological evaluation diagnosed you as having a borderline personality disorder with narcissistic features and alcohol dependence. It was recommended that you receive alcohol rehabilitation treatment and that you be administratively separated due to your diagnosed personality disorder.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04451-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2002. 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 | CY2002 | 02065-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2002. 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. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08735-01
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2002. 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 | CY2003 | 00183-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 May 2003. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to misconduct. 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 | CY2003 | 03072-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2003. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 8 April 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02182-02
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 April 2002. 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 did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such...