4
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SMS
Docket No: 5555-08
20 February 2009
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 February 2009. 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 31 January 2002, you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21.
On 7 October 2004, you had nonjudicial punishment (NUP) for
driving under the influence of alcohol. You were also
counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and
conduct and warned that further infractions could result in
disciplinary action or an other than honorable discharge.
On 18 January 2005, suspended punishment was vacated from the
NJP. On 4 March 2005, you had NUP for a brief instance of
unauthorized absence.
On 19 July 2006, your commanding officer initiated
administrative separation by reason of convenience of the
government due to alcohol rehabilitation failure and by reason
of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. In connection
with this processing, you acknowledged that separation could
result in a general discharge and waived the right to have
your case heard by an administrative discharge board. On
26 July 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge
recommendation and directed an honorable discharge by reason of
convenience of the government due to alcohol rehabilitation
failure. On 9 August 2006, you were so discharged and assigned
an RE-4 reenlistment code.
Regulations direct the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to members who are discharged due to alcohol rehabilitation
failure. 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,
W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08000-08
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. On 22 November 2005 an ADB recommended discharge under honorable conditions by reason of convenience of the government due to alcohol rehabilitation failure. On 2 February 2006 you were so discharged and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04516-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2009. 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. Given your misconduct, alcohol rehabilitation failure, and the fact that the separation authorities were ordered to issue you an RE-4...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08582-07
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 28 June 2005, you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 8 March 2006, your commanding officer...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09377-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2009. 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08080-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2009. 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 | CY2008 | 08074-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 July 2009. Your record reflects that on 9 February you received counselling due to an alcohol related incident on 26 January 1990 and were subsequently assigned to a Level I rehabilitation program on 1 February 1990. The next day you received counselling for alcohol rehabilitation failure.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03822-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 January 2009. 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. Regulations direct assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to members who are not recommended for retention or are discharged because of alcohol...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01891-08
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. Regulations direct the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to members who are discharged due to alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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 | CY2010 | 11006-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ail material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. However, about a month later, on 11 April 2006, you self- referred for participation in a drug and alcohol rehabilitation program due to alcohol abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 00223-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2011. However, the Board found these factors were insufficient to warrant changing your reentry code due to your two NUP’s, and being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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.