SJN
									Docket No: 05796-04
									27 March 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 25 March 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.

You enlisted in the Navy on 19 September 1995 at age 17. On 19 September 1996 and 19 April 1997 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for making a false official statement, a false pass offence, and disobedience. Additionally, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could result in administrative separation.

On 23 July 1997, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of misconduct. The discharge authority directed that you be separated for misconduct with a general discharge. You were so discharged on 31 July 1997. At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall record of service, the events that led to your discharge, and desire to join the Army. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to the reason you were discharged or a change to your reenlistment code given your record of two NJP’s. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is separated for misconduct. The Board also noted that you were fortunate to receive a general discharge since a discharge under other than honorable conditions is often directed when an individual is discharged for misconduct. 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