DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
TAL
Docket No: 5150-14
14 May 2015
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10, United
States Code, section 1552. The application was filed ina
timely manner.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 13 May 2015. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
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
25 August 2009. During the period from 6 July 2011 to
9 December 2011, you were the subject of multiple psychiatric
evaluations and you were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder
which deemed you unsuitable for continued military service and a
potential threat to yourself or others is retained on active
duty.
Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative
separation by reason of convenience of the government due to a
condition not a disability. On 18 January 2012, you received an
honorable discharge due to a condition not a disability and were
assigned an RE-4 (not recommended for retention) reenlistment
code.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to change your reentry code for reenlistment in the
military and assertion of inadequate legal counsel.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant relief in your case due to your diagnosed
adjustment disorder and non-recommendation for reenlistment.
Finally, there is no evidence in the record, and you provided
none, to support your assertion. Accordingly, your application
has been denied.
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 within one year from the date of the Board's
decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. 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,
ROBERT J. O’NEILL
Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9579 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 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. At that time you were assigned an RE-3P reentry code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR823 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 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 | CY2014 | NR5942 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2015. With regard to your assertion, the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence, and you submitted none, to support a conclusion that your record is in error because you were not issued a medical alert tag. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR786 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 February 2015. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in the 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02003-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 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. 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 | CY2014 | NR4526 14
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 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. At that time you were assigned an RE-3G reentry code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08448-10
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. However, the Board concluded that you were correctly assigned the RE-3G reentry code due to your diagnosed adjustment 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00562-05
On 17 December 2004 the discharge authority directed an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of fraudulent entry due to alcohol abuse. On 22 December 2004 you were so separated from the Navy, and assigned 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 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. You were so ‘discharge on 10 November 1992. : The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1004 14_Redacted
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. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of...