DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 2342-19 Ref: Signature Date This is in reference to your application of 7 February 2019 for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2020. 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, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. You originally enlisted in the Marine Corps on 22 October 2008, and reenlisted for four years 20 October 2012. On 19 April 2013, you received and signed a “Page 11” (Page 11) counseling entry documenting your lack of judgment and financial responsibility. On 23 September 2015, you received and signed a second Page 11 counseling warning regarding making a false official statement. The second Page 11 expressly stated, in part: “…you were excused from mandatory annual rifle range qualification in order to transport your spouse to the Naval Hospital Emergency Room for medical care. During a follow up visit by your OIC in order to gain insight of your spouse’s condition, it was discovered that your spouse was not a patient nor received any medical treatment from Naval Hospital Emergency Room during the time you provided. When directed by the chain of command to provide key supporting documentation to validateyour spouse’s medical visit, you attempted to transport your spouse to the Naval Hospital Emergency Room in order to obtain medical documents under false pretenses.” On 30 September 2016, you extended your enlistment for eight (8) months effective on 20 October 2016. On 28 March 2017, you received and signed another Page 11 counseling entry acknowledging that you were ineligible for reenlistment and being assigned a reentry/reenlistment code of RE-3C. The Page 11 expressly stated, in part: “I have been informed by my Commanding Officer that I am recommended but not eligible for reenlistment because I failed to demonstrate the high standards of leadership, performance, professional competence, and personal behavior required to maintain the prestige and quality standards of the Marine Corps and have been assigned a reenlistment code of RE-3C.” On 19 June 2017, at the completion of your active obligated service, you received an honorable discharge and were assigned an RE-3C reentry code. In this regard, you were assigned the authorized reentry code based on your circumstances. The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contentions that the reentry code RE-3C is an error because it corresponds to the reentry code for a conscientious objector (CO), and that the CO code is an error because you volunteered for military service and reenlisted for a second contract. The Board observed in the United States Navy, and not the Marine Corps, the RE-3C reentry code corresponds to a separation involving a CO. In the Marine Corps, the RE-3C reentry code is a catch-all code that means “when directed by CMC, or when not eligible and disqualifying factor is not covered by anyother code.” The Board also noted that your RE-3C reentry code may not prohibit reenlistment, but requires that a waiver be obtained. Recruiting personnel are responsible for determining whether you meet the standards for reenlistment and whether or not a request for a waiver of your reentry code is feasible. Additionally, the Board reviewed your application under the recent guidance provided in the Under Secretary of Defense’s memorandum dated 25 July 2018 entitled, “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations” (USD Memo). The purpose of the USD Memo is to ease the process for veterans seeking redress and assist Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records “in determining whether relief is warranted on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency.” The USD Memo noted that “increasing attention is being paid to…the circumstances under which citizens should be considered for second chances and the restoration of rights forfeited,” and that “BCM/NRs have the authority to upgrade discharges or correct military records to ensure fundamental fairness.” The USD Memo sets clear standards and principles to guide BCM/NRs in application of their equitable relief authority, and further explains that boards shall consider a number of factors to determine whether to grant relief. However, even in light of the USD Memo, the Board still concluded that, given the totality of the circumstances, your request does not merit relief. 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 the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not previously presented to or 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.