Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10757-09
Original file (10757-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DG 20370-5100 REC

Docket No: 10757-09
9 July 2010

 

 

 

Dear ay.

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 8 July 2010. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on

16 June 2010, at age 19. On 23 January 2008, during your initial
processing at the Military Entrance Processing Station, you
claimed on the report of medical history that you never had
asthma or any breathing problems. However, on 19 June 2008, you
were diagnosed with having asthma which was a condition that
existed prior to your entry into the service. On 2 July 2008,
you were informed that administrative separation processing had
been initiated. You were counseled regarding your condition, and
advised to seek treatment after separation. Based on the medical
evaluation, you were processed for separation by reason of failed
medical and physical procurement standards due to the asthma.

You were advised of your rights, and you elected to receive
copies of documents to be forwarded to the separation authority,
but waived all your other procedural rights. Subsequently, on

18 July 2008, you were discharged with an entry level separation
by reason of failed medical/physical procurement standards. At
that time, you were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-4.
The Board noted that applicable regulations require the
assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals who are
separated due to a medical condition that existed prior to entry
into the service. The Board also noted that accompanying your
application, you made the statement that prior to your enlistment
you had asthma and were prescribed an inhaler, which was required
to be documented and disclosed on your enlistment documentation.
The Board thus concluded that there is no error or injustice in
your RE-4 reenlistment code. 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,

Wy DEAN DPRAEE
Executive Dire

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06318-07

    Original file (06318-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2008. 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 | 01200-10

    Original file (01200-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2011 | 05768-11

    Original file (05768-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 March 2012. In this regard, you were assigned the most favorable reentry code based on your circumstances. 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 | CY2009 | 13210-09

    Original file (13210-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1210 14

    Original file (NR1210 14.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 February 2015. Following a review of the medical report, the commanding officer recommended separation with an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of fraudulent entry as evidenced by your deliberate omission or concealment of a condition, specifically, asthma, that existed prior to your entry into the service. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05010-10

    Original file (05010-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his RE-4 reentry code be changed. The Board, consisting of Mr. Gattis, Mr. Zsalman, and Mr. Spain, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 22 March 2011 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Although Petitioner was properly...

  • 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 | CY2009 | 08226-09

    Original file (08226-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval . 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 | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00086

    Original file (ND02-00086.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-AR, USN Docket No. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13307-09

    Original file (13307-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. On 22 March 1994, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of defective enlistment and erroneous enlistment due to the diagnosed instability of your right shoulder which was not disclosed prior to your entry into the Navy. Based on the medical evaluation, you were processed for separation by reason of failed...