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 A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
CRS
Docket No: 8197-01
25 April 2002
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 24 April 2002. 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 17,July 1998 at
age 18. The record reflects that on 20 May 1999 you received
nonjudicial punishment for an unauthorized absence, missing
movement on two occasions, and underage drinking.
On 3 June 1999 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 this recommendation, you elected to waive the right to present
your case to an administrative discharge board. After review by
the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was
approved and on 9 July 1999 you received an other than honorable
discharge. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code
of RE-4.
Applicable 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.
Accordingly, 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 or reason for separation 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 | 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 | 02767-02
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. 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 | 02889-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 ~ p r i l 2003. 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 review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 2 March 2002 you received a general discharge by...
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 | CY2002 | 01896-02
A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2002. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02682-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2002. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02161-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 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 | 03422-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2 0 0 2 . 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 | 07879-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. You enlisted in the Navy on 9 June 1999 at age 17. 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.