DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 2623-08
20 November 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 19 November 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.
On 14 March 1983, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19 and served
without incident until 5 March 1986, when you had nonjudicial
punishment for wrongful disposition of government property and
obtaining services under false pretenses. On 13 March 1987,
you signed a service record entry in which you acknowledged
that you were not recommended for retention due to minor
disciplinary infractions and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment
code. On 13 March 1987, you were honorably released from
active duty due to being transferred to the Navy Reserve and
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 13 March 1989, you were
honorably discharged from the Navy Reserve due to the
expiration of your obligated service and were not recommended
for retention.
Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment
code to service members who are honorably released from active
duty and are not recommended for retention. Given your
disciplinary record, and 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 the RE-4
reenlistment code. 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,
Vom
W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Dir Oo
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06986-07
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.On 25 February 1986, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 30 October 1987, you acknowledged by a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06491-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered ‘your application on 6 May 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reenlistment code because of your refusal to accept...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 08558-00
A three—member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2001. Your performance evaluation for the period from 1 December 1987 to 13 April 1988 reflects a nonrecommendation for continued service or reenlistment because you were not a positive contributor to the Navy. However, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code given your substandard performance and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3575-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2014. In October 1989, you received an OTH characterization of service discharge due to misconduct, and were assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) . 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 | CY2007 | 07256-07
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.On 3 March 1987, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 25. On 6 January 1988, the Disability Evaluation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05732-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 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. 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 | CY2007 | 07802-07
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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant changing the RE-4 reenlistment code or recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of your misconduct. Furthermore, regulations do not require a second urinalysis to discharge a member by...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09878-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 November 2008. You elected not to consult counsel, have your case heard before an administrative discharge board, and did not object to the administrative discharge action. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09688-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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. Applicable regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to Sailors who are separated due to a diagnosed personality disorder.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00259-08
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. Shortly thereafter, you received the following disciplinary actions: In October 1986, an NUP for unauthorized absence (UA), in May 1987, another NJP for being UA again, and in September 1987, an NUP for UA and for disobeying a lawful order. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...