Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00459-10
Original file (00459-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
REC

Docket No: 00459-10
22 September 2010

 

ae.

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 22 September 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
17 June 2003, at age 18. On 9 July 2003, a medical health
evaluation was conducted and you confessed to having been
diagnosed, prior to your enlistment, with asthma and using an
inhaler. You admitted to having asthma attacks since age 13.
However, you failed to disclose this important information on
your enlistment physical. It was determined that your lack of
properly disclosing information warranted assigning a
reenlistment code of RE-4 for fraudulent entry into the military.
On 22 July 2003, you were discharged with an entry level
separation from active duty due to fraudulent entry.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your overall record
of service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were
not sufficient to warrant a change in the characterization of
service or reenlistment code, which was based on your fraudulent
entry. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is
appropriately assigned when an individual is discharged for
fraudulent entry and is not recommended for retention.
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,

W. DEAN PFE
Executive

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01211-10

    Original file (01211-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 November 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. You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 28 August 2010, at age 19.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05669-09

    Original file (05669-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    + : A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 February 2010. In this regard, an RE-4 reenlistment code is required when an individual is discharged for fraudulent entry and is not recommended for retention. 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 | CY2010 | 00654-10

    Original file (00654-10.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 October 2010. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11662-09

    Original file (11662-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 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. However, since you failed to disclose this important information on your in-processing paperwork, this is considered fraudulent enlistment.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13351-09

    Original file (13351-09.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. However, you failed to disclose this important information during your enlistment physical. 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 | CY2010 | 00510-10

    Original file (00510-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 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 | CY2009 | 11151-09

    Original file (11151-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 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 | CY2009 | 12555-09

    Original file (12555-09.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 July 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 | 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 | CY1999 | 08374-98

    Original file (08374-98.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 April 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. advised approximately three years ago, and had been treated with A pulmonary function test on 8 July 1997 confirmed medication. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...