DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
I3OARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TRG
Docket No: 1678-06
27 September 2006

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 September 2006. 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, th Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 9 May 1996 at age 17 and then earned three consecutive qualifying years for reserve retirement. On 1 July 1999 you were counseled concerning a nonrecornmendation for promotion because you left a drill without authorization. On 6 August 1999 you received nonjudicial punishment for missing the movement of your unit to a training site. The punishment imposed was a reduction in rank to lance corporal. On 2 October 1999, you were again counseled concerning a nonrecommendation for promotion because of unsatisfactory drill attendance. On 18 January 2000 you were transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve and were honorably discharged on 29 March 2000. At that time, you were apparently assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

You state in your application that you were honorably discharged on 29 March 2000 so that you could enlist in the Hawaii Army National Guard. You contend, in effect, that you should not have been assigned the RE-4 reenlistment code when you transferred to another military component.

As indicated, the record shows that you were counseled concerning unsatisfactory drill participation on two occasions and received nonjudicial punishment for missing movement of your unit. The Board believed that this record of poor performance was sufficient to support 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 PFEIFFER
	Executive Director	

2