DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 3203-00
18 June 2001
Dear ‘Siiliaiaaialieg?
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 7 June 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 served on active duty in the Navy from 15 February 1984 to 14
February 1987, when you were released from active duty and assigned a reenlistment code of
RE-4. You reenlisted in the Navy on 4 October 1988. You received level three alcohol
rehabilitation services during your second enlistment, but were thought to have a "guarded"
prognosis for full recovery. In addition, you were diagnosed as suffering from a personality
disorder, not otherwise specified, with schizotypal traits. You were found physically
qualified for separation on 16 April 1991, and discharged under other than honorable
conditions on 23 April 1991, by reason of misconduct, due to multiple violations of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Naval Discharge Review Board denied your request
for upgrade of your discharge on 27 August 1993.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for further service by
reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, and that your discharge by reason
of misconduct was erroneous or unjust, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective
action in your case. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06485-00
addition, the evaluation comments concerning your poor performance of duty would support the assignment of an reenlistment code. than others discharged for misconduct or poor performance of duty, the Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of the RE-4 reenlistment code. 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 | 02202-00
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 concluded that in the absence of the last performance evaluation, withholding your advancement and the nonjudicial punishment for a period of unauthorized absence were sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03279-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 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. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when a Sailor is discharged due to misconduct.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08844-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2008. 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. However, on 4 November 1991, the separation authority directed that you be separated with a discharge warranted by your service record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00086-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for duty at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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 | CY2006 | 09544-06
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 7 August 1989 at age 18. On 6 March 1992 you were so discharged and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03926-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 October 2006. 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 | CY2001 | 03333-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2001. 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 | CY2001 | 04800-00
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 accept your contention to the effect that the acts of misconduct which resulted in your reduction to grade E-3 and discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court- martial were attributable to the effects of an undiagnosed medical condition; that you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11189-06
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 Navy on 20 April 1988 after three years of prior honorable service. On 11 March...