Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05634-01
Original file (05634-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E   NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2  N A V Y A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

JRE 
Docket No:  5634-01 
7 March  2002 

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

A  three-member panel  of  the Board  for Correction  of  Naval  Records,  sitting in executive 
session, considered your  application on  28 February 2002.  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, your 
naval  record  and  applicable statutes, regulations and  policies. 

After careful and  conscientious consideration of  the entire record, the Board  found that the 
evidence submitted was  insufficient to establish the existence of  probable material error or 
injustice. 

The Board  found that you  underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on  29 October 
1999.  You  did not disclose any history  of  diseaqe or medical treatment in  the Statement of 
Medical History you  completed on  that date.  You  specifically denied a history of  broken 
bones.  You  served  in  the Navy  from 7 September to 2 October 2000, when  you  were 
discharged for failing to  meet  procurement  medical standards due degenerative joint  disease 
in  your left great toe,  which  was  fractured in  1998, and  a bunionectomy, which  apparently 
was performed prior to October  1999.  You  were assigned a reenlistment code of  RE-4,  as 
required by  governing directives.  There is no indication in  the available records that you 
sustained  significant injury to  your  foot or toe during your period  of  service. 

The Board  was  not persuaded  that  your discharge was erroneous, or that  you  were unjustly 
assigned an  RE-4 reenlistment code. The statement of  your physician  to the effect that he 
does not  think that  military training will  necessarily hasten the degeneration of  your toe joint, 
and  that you  could participate in  military training activities was  not considered  sufficient to 
warrant  any corrective action in  your case. 

In  addition, it noted that an  RE-4 cbde is not an 

absolute bar  to  reenlistment, as it may  be  waived by  the Chief  of  Naval  Personnel in 
appropriate cases. 

In  view  of  the foregoing, the Board  was  unable to recommend  any corrective action in  your 
case.  Accordingly,  your  application has been  denied.  The names and  votes of  the members 
of  the panel  will  be  furnished upon  request. 

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  submission of  new 
and  material evidence or other matter 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 of  probable material error or 
injustice. 

Sincerely, 

W.  DEAN  PFEIFFER 
Executive Director 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10471-02

    Original file (10471-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2003. Applicable regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code when an individual is discharged due to a personality disorder. The Board did not consider whether the characterization of service or reason for your separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07879-01

    Original file (07879-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. You enlisted in the Navy on 9 June 1999 at age 17. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01896-02

    Original file (01896-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2002. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03198-02

    Original file (03198-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2002. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00848-02

    Original file (00848-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2002. On 10 October 1991 you were notified that separation action was being initiated by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment, as evidenced by the diagnosis of enuresis. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08493-01

    Original file (08493-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. On 20 October 1995 you were notified that separation action was being initiated due to the diagnosed personality disorder. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00889-03

    Original file (00889-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The reenlistment code assigned by the Marine Corps is an administrative marking which reflects the member's acceptability for reenlistment at the time...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10311-02

    Original file (10311-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 05583-98

    Original file (05583-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 March 1999. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CMC memorandum 1001/ 1 MMEA-6 of 17 February 1999, a copy of which is attached. - On 7 April 1997, u r n t e His current reenlistment was r enlistment contract was a probationary reenlistment contract.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08197-01

    Original file (08197-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 April 2002. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...