DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
70t S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 3499-11
24 January 2012
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 19 January 2012. 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 and began a period of active duty on
20 January 2009 at age 19. Based on the information currently
contained in your record it appears that you were diagnosed with
a medical condition which was not a disability. You were
subsequently involuntarily processed for an entry level
Separation. In connection with this process, you would have
acknowledged the separation action and the separation authority’
would have approved a recommendation for separation. The record
Clearly shows that on 22 May 2009, you were discharged with an
entry-level separation by reason of a condition not a disability.
At that time you were assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code, which
means that you were neither recommended nor eligible for
reenlistment.
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 concluded
these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the
reentry code and you did not provide any evidence to support
changing it. 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,
\ Saag DEAN
Executive
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08827-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 July 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 04180-11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2012. 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. Your record reflects that in April 2002 you enlisted in the Air Force and were subsequently separated with an entry level separation by reason of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 05824 11
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 February 2012. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the reentry code. 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 | CY2010 | 10442-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 October 2010. 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. In connection with this processing, you would have acknowledged the separation action and the discharge authority would have approved a recommendation for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1223 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03009-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 January 2010. 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 Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your character of service or your reenlistment code which were correctly assigned...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01284-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 2009. Regulations direct assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to members who are discharged due to fraudulent 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 | CY2008 | 02019-08
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. Further, the Board concluded that your diagnosed depressive disorder was sufficient to support the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03447-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2009. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant t demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00343-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval. 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. Based on the mental evaluation, you were processed for separation by reason of erroneous enlistment.