Docket No: 5633-19 
Ref: Signature Date  
  
Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application 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 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, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 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. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 14 January 2014.  On 19 November 2014, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for unauthorized absence (UA).  You were awarded restriction and reduction in rank.  On 22 December 2014, you received your final Evaluation Report and Counseling Record.  Your individual trait average was 2.33.  In the promotion recommendation section, your rater marked “Significant Problems” and in the retention section your rater marked “Not Recommended.”  In the comments section, your rater wrote, in part:  “Received proper guidance and had every opportunity to excel; however, his efforts were overshadowed by his inability to meet minimum performance standards.  Member has a pattern of multiple unauthorized absences.”  Subsequently, administrative discharge action was initiated.  On 22 December 2014, you were discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service, a reentry (RE) code of RE-4, and a narrative reason for separation of pattern of misconduct. 
 
You request the Board change your RE code to RE-3.  You assert the reentry code is unjust because you were not given the resources to address the underlying issues you were experiencing and that at age 19 you were not ready to be on your own.  Additionally, you claim you have changed, stated everyone deserves a second chance, were not aware of the consequences of your actions and were not aware of the impact they would have on your life. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service and contentions and concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change to your RE code.  Your original service record was incomplete and did not contain any documentation pertaining to your separation from the Navy.  The Board noted that you provided no evidence to support your contentions.  Absent of such evidence, the Board relied upon the presumption of regularity and presumed that the officials acted in good faith according to governing law and policy.  Further, there is no provision of law or in Navy regulations that allows for changing a RE code due solely to the passage of time. 
 
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. 
 
Sincerely,