DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
‘WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
CRS
Docket No: 701-09
18 March 2009
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 19 February 2009. 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 enlisted in the Navy on 1 February 2005.
You sought medical treatment for knee pain on 18 April 2005 and
several occasions thereafter, and were give a diagnosis of right
knee strain, which existed prior to your enlistment. As the
condition remained unresolved after you had completed physical
therapy and several weeks of light duty, a physician determined
that you were not physically qualified for aircrew school, and
unsuitable for naval service. You were separated from the Navy
with an entry level separation on 3 June 2005, by reason of a
condition, not a disability, which interfered with your
performance of duty. You were assigned a reentry code of RE-4,
as permitted by governing directives.
The Board was not persuaded that your reentry code was assigned
in error, or that its continued presence in your record is
unjust. Your mistaken belief that you would be eligible to
reenlist after the passage of a certain period of time, despite
your adverse reentry code, is not probative of the existence of
material error or injustice in your naval record, and does not
provide a basis for granting your request. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. ‘The names and votes of the members
of the pane! 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,
Executive Dil
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01359-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability at the time of to your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01200-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 November 2010. However, on 23 July 2009, a medical evaluation was conducted and you documented that you had right knee pain and swelling prior to commencing your active duty, but failed to document that fact. The Board noted that applicable regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reentry code to individuals who are separated due to a medical condition that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04587-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04551-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. 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 | CY2010 | 10702-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 October 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04018-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA effective the day after you were discharged from the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06935-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. The diagnosis of your knee condition was changed to chondromalacia patella (CMP), and you were recommended for discharge because knee pain which interfered with your ability to perform your duties as a recruit. 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 | 06233-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2011. 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 | 01678-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 May 2009. You were given diagnoses of grade III/IV AC separation and left knee pain, and recommended for entry level separation due to your EPTE shoulder pain. 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 | 06051-08
of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 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 material error or injustice.