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

TRG
Docket No: 8914-06
8 November2006

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 31 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 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 23 March 1987 at age 22. During the period from 30 July 1987 to 28 January 1988, you received nonjudicial punishment on three occasions. Your offenses were two instances of assault, an unspecified period of unauthorized absence, disobedience, breaking restriction and breach of the peace. After the second nonjudicial punishment, you were counseled and warned that further misconduct could lead to discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 9 June 1988 you received nonjudicial punishment for a short period of unauthorized absence, disobedience, dereliction of duty and use of cocaine. Subsequently, a medical officer found that you were not drug dependent.

Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge by reason of misconduct. In connection with this processing, you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge. board, but submitted a statement requesting a general discharge. On 28 October 1988, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions. Subsequently, you were an unauthorized absentee for about seven days. After review, the separation authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions and you were so discharged on 15 December 1988. At that time, you were not recommended for reenlistment and were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contention that you did not knowingly use drugs and your desire for veterans’ benefits. The Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given the frequency of your misconduct and use of cocaine. The Board was aware that you apparently did not raise the issue of unknowing use of drugs at the time of your nonjudicial punishment and discharge processing. The Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.

Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of misconduct. Since you have been treated no differently than others discharged, 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 PFEIEFFER
Executive Director

2