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

SMW
Docket No:5828-06
20 October 2006

This ± 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 Record , sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 October 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 a application, together with all material submitted in support thereof , your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and sides.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to est bush the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 1 December 1998 at age 19. During the period from 8 to 9 April 1999 you were in an unauthorized absence (UA) status. On 9 April 1999 you were also convicted by civil court of uttering five worthless checks totaling $363.06. The 
court sentenced you to probation, community service, and remittance of probation and court costs.

On 10 July 2001 you began a period of UA that ended on 13 August 2001, period of about 34 days. On 1 October 2001 you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for the 34 day UA, missing the movement of your ship, and disrespect. On 10 January 2002 you began another period of UA that ended on 13 January 2002, and on 13 Mar h 2002 you received NJP for this offense. On 13 March
2002 y u were counseled regarding deficiencies in your performance and conduct, and warned that further infractions could result in disciplinary action or an other than honorable discharge.

You received performance evaluations on 14 March and 15 July 2002 that stated you were not recommended for retention. On 7 January
2003 y u received your last performance evaluation that also stated that you were not recommended for retention, and you were released from active duty on that same date with an honorable characerization of service due to completion of required active service . At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, which means that you are not eligible or recommended for reenlistment.

Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when a individual is released from active duty due to completion of retired active service and is not recommended for retention. Since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, and given the two NJP’s and the civil conviction, 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 f 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