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

SNW
Docket No: 8809-07
30 May 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 May 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.

On 27 February 2002, you enlisted in the Navy at age 24. During the period 22 March to 12 November 2002, you received medical treatment for back pain. On 13 January 2003, you received an orthopedic evaluation which recommended administrative separation due to chronic back pain that existed prior to enlistment. On 15 January 2003, your commanding officer initiated administrative separation by reason of convenience of the government due to a condition not a disability. In connection with this processing, you acknowledged the separation action. On 31 January 2003, you signed a service record entry in which you acknowledged that you were not eligible for reenlistment. On 31 January 2003, you were honorably discharged by reason of convenience of the government due to a condition not a disability and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.

Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to members who are discharged due to a condition not a disability. Since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director

2