DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-51OO

SMW
Docket No: 10666-07
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 30 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.

On 3 September 1985, you enlisted in the Navy at age 19. You then served without incident until 30 June and 2 September 1989, when you were counseled f or having received derogatory performance evaluations. On 2 September 1989, you acknowledged a service record entry which stated that you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code because you were not recommended for reenlistment. On 2 September 1989, you were honorably released from active duty and assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 14 July 1993, you were honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve due to the expiration of your obligated service.

Regulations direct the assignment of an RE—4 reenlistment code to members who are released from active duty and not recommended for reenlistment. 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