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

Docket No: 9779-17 
Ref: Signature date 

Dear :
 
This is in reference to your application for reconsideration of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, UnitedStates Code, Section 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary of the Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were previously denied relief by the Board on 11 April 2013, Docket No: 05746-12. 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, your application has been denied. 

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 three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2019. 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, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 12 September 2005. You served without disciplinary incident for nearly three years. On 31 August 2008, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for disrespect and use of provoking speech or gestures, indecent language, and attempted assault. You received an administrative counseling and warning the same day. On 15 June 2009, you signed administrative remarks in your service record acknowledging that you would not be recommended for reenlistment and would be assigned a reentry (RE) code of RE-4. On 13 August 2009, you were discharged from the Navy to attend civilian school. At the time of your discharge, you held the grade of E-2; you received an honorable characterization of service and an RE-4. 

In your petition to the Board you contend that the RE-4 was given to you unjustly.You state that you separated from the Navy to attend civilian school. After you were discharged, you completed yourfour-year degree, and now wish to serve again. You also note that some agencies such as the    State Troopers, will not accept an RE-4. You assert in part that you are entitled to a change to your RE-4 because you were honorably discharged. 

The Board carefully reviewed your application and took into account your claims that you were unjustly assigned an RE-4. The Board noted that you were separated in the grade of E-2 after nearly four years of active duty, and that you had an NJP within the year prior to your discharged. Based on the circumstances of your separation and your awareness of the receipt of the RE-4, as evidenced by the 15 June 2009 administrative remarks, the Board found that the RE-4 was issued without error or injustice. The Board concluded that you did not provide sufficient evidence to overcome the information reflected in your record, and that the RE-4 does not merit corrective action. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters. New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board. In the absence of sufficient new matters for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 

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, 


5/14/2019