DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 7886-15 
OEC 2 2 2016 


This is in reference to your latest reconsideration received 1 June 2015. You previously petitioned the Board in 1991 and1994 and were advised in our letters that your applications had been disapproved. Your case was reconsidered in accordan
ce with Board for Correction of Naval Records procedures that confonn to 35 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). 

Your current request has been carefully examined by a three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session on 4 August 201 6. The names and votes ofthe members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application and ap.y material submitted in suppon-of your application. 

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board detennined the new evidence you provided was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. The Board concluded the RE-4 reentry code was authorized and is routinely assigned to individuals who accept training and agree to reenlist or extend their enlistment but fail to do so. In your case, you were aware ofthe required additional obligated service but you failed to complete it. Finally, there is no provision of federal law or in Navy regulations that allows for a change in a reentry code due solely to the passage of time. Accordingly, your application for reconsideration has been denied. 

In the absence of sufficient material evidence for reconsideration, the decision ofthe Board is final, and your only recourse would be to initiate action, at no cost to the Board, to a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 
Sincerely, 

Executive Director