Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05585-09
Original file (05585-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX -
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 05585-09

20 July 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. You request that the diagnosis
of asthma be removed from your naval record.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 9 July 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. In this regard, the Board found that
although a nurse practitioner indicates in a statement dated 16
May 2009 that she had reviewed your “available medical history”
and found no “clear evidence of asthma”, entries in your pre-
service health record indicate that you were diagnosed with
asthma and prescribed inhaled medication. You were discharged
from the Navy by reason of erroneous entry on 18 July 2008 after
you disclosed your pre-service history of asthma.

In view of the foregoing, there does not appear to by any basis
for removing the diagnosis of asthma from your record, and 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,

LD eo ark
W. DEAN PFEDEF
Executive Dijrec

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07584-01

    Original file (07584-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 2001. Documentary material considered by the Board 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. You denied a history of asthma and shortness of breath, but disclosed that you had been treated for pneumonia.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06953-10

    Original file (06953-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 1s on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11539-09

    Original file (11539-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01306-09

    Original file (01306-09.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 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02176-06

    Original file (02176-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. In addition, the Board concluded that either you concealed your history of asthma in order to fraudulently procure your enlistment, or that you concocted a history of asthma in order to fraudulently procured your discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01825-11

    Original file (01825-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. On 13 October 1995 you were given a diagnosis of asthma, which was considered disqualifying for enlistment and not correctable to meet Navy standards. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval trecord, the burden ig on the applicant to demonstrate the pexistence of probq@ble material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01543-09

    Original file (01543-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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. As you have not demonstrated that you should have received a more favorable reentry code than RE-3P, and as you were fortunate to have received that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07327-01

    Original file (07327-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2001. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12878 11

    Original file (12878 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 October 2012. In addition it noted that you could have been processed for separation by reason of fraudulent entry based on your concealment of what you believed to be a pre-service history of asthma. 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 | CY2004 | 02989-04

    Original file (02989-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-separation physical examination on 10 November 1999. You...