DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 6087-08
28 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 16 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 that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 9 July 2007.
You underwent psychiatric evaluation on 15 November 2007
following a suicide attempt. You were given a diagnosis of
depressive disorder, not otherwise specified, existed prior to
service, and recommended for an entry level separation. You were
evaluated by another psychiatrist on 16 November 2007, who
determined that while you were considered “low risk” at that
time, you posed a significant risk if you were to remain on
active duty. She did not recommend that you be retained in the
Navy. On 19 December 2007 you received an entry level separation
by reason of erroneous entry, and were assigned a reentry code of
RE-4,
The Board noted that a reentry code of RE-4, while not required,
is authorized by regulatory guidance and is often assigned to
service members separated by reason of erroneous entry,
especially in cases such as yours where the enlistment is deemed
erroneous because of a disqualifying psychological condition and
a history of a suicide attempt or gesture.
The Board carefully considered your contention to the effect that
a second psychiatrist considered you to be of low risk in
behavior, but found it to be of no probative value because, as
indicated above, she concluded that you would pose a significant
risk if retained on active duty, and did not recommend that you
be retained in the Navy. The Board concluded that it would not be
in the interest of justice to assign you a more favorable reentry
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, ~
RNs
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D a
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06296-01
separated under similar circumstances, the Board could find no The error or injustice in your assignment reenlistment code. to that board. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03886-01
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. the discharge authority Thereafter, You did not You were The fact that you did not receive The Board noted your contention to the effect that you During classification interviews in recruit it is determined whether an individual is qualified for "A" school, even though you had and as a result...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 08380-06
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.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 22 May 2006. The evaluator concluded that you...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501213
The Applicant requested that her characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the attached letter: “To whom it may concern: I, C_ M_ H_(Applicant) (social security number deleted) , respectfully request to have my RE code changed from a RE-4 to a RE- 1. After a thorough review of all available records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04735-07
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.The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 26 July 2006. A psychiatric evaluation conducted...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 02469-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 August 1999. The record reflects that on 30 June 1998 you were referred to a mental health unit because of suicidal ideation, inability to tolerate authority, and a prior undisclosed history of psychiatric treatment. Separation by erroneous entry is authorized when an enlistment would not have occurred if a disqualifying factor had been known prior to enlistment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02458-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 August 2008. 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. You were assigned a reentry code of RE-4, On 3 November 1993 the Bureau of Naval Personnel informed your command that you did not qualify for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00430-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2002. 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. You claimed recurrent suicidal ideation since arriving at recruit training and stabbed yourself because "Nobody would listen to me...now they are listening."
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00980-01
980-01 14 June 2001 This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. applicat:.on for correction of your A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session,, considered your application on 12 June 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Iof an RE-4 reenlistment code Regulations...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00151-01
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session considered your application on 6 June injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable...