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

Docket No: 8438-16 
OCT 10 2017 


Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions oftitle 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three­member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on I0 July 2017. The names and votes of the members of tl~e 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 ofthis Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding ofthe issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

You began a period of active duty in the Navy on 18 August 2004. On 23 September 2004, when in boot camp, you were seen by Navy medical and diagnosed with recurrent major depressive disorder. During the 23 September 2004 medical evaluation, you reported a history of psychiatric treatment and psychiatric diagnoses that were not disclosed during the enlistment process. On l October 2004, Commanding Officer, Recruit Training Command forwarded his recommendation for separating you from military service with an Entry Level Separation (ELS) uncharacterized discharge on the basis of erroneous entry and fraudulent entry. You were discharged from the Navy on 7 October 2004, with an uncharacterized ELS and a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. 

The Board considered that you would like a change to your RE-4 code for purposes of reenlistment. When making its determination, the Board noted that you state during the administrative separation proceedings you followed the advice ofNavy personnel who led you to believe that you could reenlist. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material or injustice. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, including the 2016 psychological assessment that you provided with your application for correction. The psychological assessment was conducted by a civilian clinical psychologist over the period offour sessions held between 25 April 2016 and 25 May 2016. The assessment contains DSM-5 Diagnoses of major depressive disorder (moderate severity) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (predominately inattentive type by history), with mild nonverbal learning symptoms. The Board reviewed the administrative separation process conducted while you were in boot camp and considered your current medical evaluation when determining if the RE-4 was issued in error or injustice. The Board found that since you failed to disclose your full medical history during the enlistment process, your separation for fraudulent entry and the issuance of an RE-4 were appropriate. In detennining whether a waivable medical code should be granted instead of the RE-4, the Board reviewed the basis for your separation (fraudulent entry) and your psychological evaluation of 2016. The Board found that your current psychological assessment raises concerns about your suitability for military service and as such, does not overcome your initial fraudulent entry into the Navy. The Board determined the RE-4 is appropriate. Accordingly, your application has been denied. 
It is regretted that thel circumstances of your case are such that favorable actidn cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence 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 ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director