DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DCG 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 3055-10
25 January 2011
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 17 November 2010. 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 21 August 1989.
On 6 October 1989 you were given a diagnosis of keratoconus,
existing prior to service. On 20 October 1989 you received an
entry level separation by reason of erroneous entry and were.
assigned a reentry code of RE-4.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, and the unsubstantiated
contention they you were medically fit prior to enlistment. The
Board concluded that those factors were insufficient to warrant
characterizing or changing the reason for your discharge. It
noted that an entry level separation is reguired when separation
processing is initiated within the first 180 days of active duty.
The Board found that a reentry code of RE-4 is authorized by
regulatory guidance in cases such as yours and is often assigned
+o service members separated by reason of erroneous entry. The
Board was not persuaded that it would 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 reghlarify attaches to all official records.
Gonsequently, when app¥ying for a correction of an official naval
vecord, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PF
Executive Ditréctdar
wh
“tee:
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12456-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval - Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 August 2011. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for separation. 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 | CY2013 | NR7039 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2014. Regulations authorized the assignment of an RE-4 reentry code when an individual is discharged by reason of erroneous entry. 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 | CY2009 | 05018-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 2010. On 5 April 1989, you were notified of pending administrative separation action due to your diagnosed personality disorder. 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 | CY2011 | 01358-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your -application on 2 November 2011. Applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reentry code to individuals who are separated due to erroneous entry based on pre-service use of drugs. 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 | CY2014 | NR4120 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2015. 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. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03522-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 February 2011. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1206 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2015. Since you enlisted in error, you were assigned the most appropriate reenlistment code based on your circumstances. 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 | CY2014 | NR0732 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 July 2014. On 6 March 2013, you were diagnosed with hepatitis B which existed prior to your enlistment and recommended for administrative separation. The Board noted that an RE-3E is the most favorable reentry code that may be assigned to individuals who are separated by reason of erroneous enlistment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1292 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 February 2015.. 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. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate reentry code based on your circumstances.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2924 14
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on.the...