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

SJN
									Docket No: 08319-07 
									31 July 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 29 July 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 3 June 1999 at age 18. On 2 December 1999, you were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder. The report stated that you admitted to suicidal ideation but denied a plan or intent for self-harm and contracted for safety. It also stated that you had depressed symptoms, increased anger since your enlistment, expressed a strong desire to be discharged, and that you would do “whatever it takes” to get out of the Navy. It was determined that you would be considered for administrative separation. Based on the diagnosis, you were processed for separation by reason of a condition that did not constitute a physical disability, but which interfered with your ability to perform military duties. Based on the information currently contained in your record it appears you were honorably discharged on 25 February 2000. At that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and overall record of service. Nevertheless, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reenlistment code given the diagnosed adjustment disorder. An RE-4 reenlistment code is routinely assigned under such circumstances. 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