Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01981-02
Original file (01981-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

NAVY 

ANNEX

2 

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

S

JRE
Docket No: 198 l-02
15 July 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
session, considered your application  
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, regulatiqns and policies.

oq 27 June 2002. Your allegations of error and injustice

  in executive

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.

1, when you were discharged by reason of erroneous entry due to your failure to

The Board found that you served on active duty in the Navy from 26 September to 17
October 200  
meet the minimum physical standards for enlistment.
psychiatric condition, which you concealed when you underwent your pre-enlistment physical
examination. The Board concluded that given the circumstances of your enlistment, which
was fraudulent, and the nature of your mental disorder, there is no basis for awarding you a
reenlistment code more favorable than the RE-4 code you received at separation.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
panel will be furnished upon request,

The names and votes of the members of the

You suffered from a disqualifying

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.
important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official

  records.

In this regard, it is

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 | 06073-01

    Original file (06073-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board noted that an RE-3P reenlistment code is the most favorable reenlistment code authorized by regulatory guidance for individuals discharged due to a physical disability. thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in your Accordingly, your application has been reenlistment code. 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 | CY2005 | 05480-05

    Original file (05480-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 April 2006. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10613-10

    Original file (10613-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 October 2010. On 20 August 2002 you were given a diagnosis of bee sting allergy, which was considered disqualifying for enlistment and not correctable to meet Navy Standards. 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 | CY2008 | 04616-08

    Original file (04616-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 May 2009. 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 | CY2009 | 03727-09

    Original file (03727-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 January 2010. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06435-01

    Original file (06435-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 1 February 2002. Your were discharged on 27 July 1972 pursuant to the approved findings of a medical board that you failed to meet the minimum physical standards for enlistment because of the residual effects of a knee injury you sustained in January 1972, which you failed to disclose when you underwent your pre- enlistment physical examination. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01451-01

    Original file (01451-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 May 2002. You were considered physically qualified for separation on 19 November 1959, and you were honorably discharged by reason of unsuitability on that date. 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 | 04274-02

    Original file (04274-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 December 2002. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you suffered from a mental or physical disorder which was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of service, and rendered you unfit by reason of physical disability, as opposed to unsuitable for service, there is no basis for any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06403-02

    Original file (06403-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 December 2002. The Board concluded that you were not physically qualified for military service, and that you would not have been permitted to enlist had you disclosed the disqualifying conditions. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04440-01

    Original file (04440-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 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...