DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2
NAVY
ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 5780-02
20 December
2002
From:
To:
Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Secretary of the Navy
Subj
:
Ref:
Encl:
FORMER
REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD
(a)
(1)
(2)
10
W.S.C. 1552
DD Form 149
Subject’s naval record
1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner,
filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his reenlistment code be amended. He
contends that he does not have a perforated eardrum.
2. The Hoard, consisting of Messrs. Grover, Neuschafer and Pauling, reviewed Petitioner’s
allegations of error and injustice on 12 December 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations,
determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available
evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the
enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations
of
errof and injustice finds as follows:
a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies
available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b. Enclosure (1) was filed in a timely manner.
c. Petitioner enlisted on 28 September 2000. On day of training 2-5, he complained of
ear pain, hearing loss and tinnitus. He was noted to have a retraction of the left eardrum, as
well as a small perforation. At that time he disclosed a history of emplaced ear tubes, and
frequent ear infections. Given those findings, his complaints, and his refusal to undergo
surgery to repair the ear drum, he was recommended for an entry level separation. He was
discharged on 3 November 2000 by reason of his failure to meet procurement medical fitness
standards, and assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4. He was examined by a civilian
physician on an unspecified date following his discharge. The physician observed the
retraction of the ear drum, but did not note a perforation.
CONCLUSION:
s separation was proper. He failed to meet procurement medical standards because
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that
Petitioner ’
of the symptoms associated with his ear pathology. The post-service findings of his private
physician were considered insufficient to demonstrate that he did not have a perforated
eardrum while he was in the Navy, or that his discharge was erroneous. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Board does not feel that it is fair that he be stigmatized by a reenlistment code
of RE-4; accordingly, it recommends the following corrective action.
RECOMMENDATION:
a. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned a
reenlistment code of
RE-3E, vice RE-4, on 3 November 2000.
b. That so much of Petitioner ’s request for correction of her naval record as exceeds
the foregoing be denied.
c. That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner
’s naval record.
4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was
present at the Board ’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete
record of the Board ’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Recorder
5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of
the Board for correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e))
and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing
corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board
on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00292-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board questing, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned a reenlistment (RF) code of RE-1, vice the code of RE-4 he received on 19 July 2000 2. He was discharged on 19 July 2000, for failing to meet medical/physical procurement standards because of a hearing loss. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01854
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01854 INDEX CODE: 108.02 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His injury be changed from Existing Prior To Service (EPTS) to In Line of Duty (ILOD). The reports and disposition letter clearly shows the condition was ILOD. Under the laws in effect at the time, the services did not assign...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03136-01
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board show that he was assigned a reenlistment (RE) code received on 19 May 2000. retquesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to more favorable than the RE-4 he 2. That Petitioner ’s naval recolrd be corrected to show that on 19 May 2000, he was discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment, and assigned a reenlistment code of RE-3P in lieu of the code of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04323-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No: 4323-01 20 July 2001 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: Ref: Encl: FORMER REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, show that he was assigned a reenlistment code of RE-3, 18 December 1998. hereinafter referred to as...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06464-00
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned a reenlistment received on 6 April 20. CONCLUSION: Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner should have been discharged because of a condition, not a disability, interfering with his performance of duty, because of his...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02456-01
In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. That Petitioner ’s naval record be corrected to show that on 8 December 2000, was discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment, and assigned a reenlistment code of 3P in lieu of the code of RE-4 actually assigned on ,that date. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 07640-98
Y DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAW ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No: 7640-98 30 April 1999 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy L REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to show that he was assigned a reenlistment code of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03912-01
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY \ S JRE Docket No: 39 12-01 6 February 2002 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD NAVY ANNEX 2 WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj : Ref: Encl: FORME REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) 10 U.S.C. The Board, consisting of Ms. Nofziger and Messrs. Chapman and Kim, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 31 January 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07200-06
e. Regulations allow for the assignment of his RE-3E reenlistment code when an individual is discharged by reason of erroneous enlistment. When an individual is discharged by reason of “Failed Medical Physical Procurement Standards” the only authorized code is an RE-4 reenlistment code.CONCLUSION:Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. This code will alert recruiters that there is a problem which...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07449-05
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, aformer enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with thisBoard requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by changing the RE-4 reenlistment code assigned on 28 February1994.2. The Board, consisting of Messrs.reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 18 January 2007 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence...