DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX JRE
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 poopet No. 04551-10
11 February 2011
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 27
January 2011. 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.
You enlisted in the Navy on 28 July 2005. You received an enlisted
evaluation report for the period 29 September 2005-25 January 2006,
in which your individual trait average was 1.0 on a 5 point scale,
and you were not recommended for retention. You underwent a mental
health evaluation on 24 April 2006 and were given a diagnosis of
anxiety disorder, not otherwise specified, that was manifested by
your inability to function appropriately when exposed to uniformed
Marines. On 19 May 2006 you were discharged for the convenience of
the government by reason of a physical or mental condition (a phobia
of Marines) that was not considered a physical disability, and
assigned a reentry code of RE-4. As you were not recommended for
reenlistment, the assignment of a code of RE-4 was required.
The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contentions to the
effect that you chose to be discharged because you felt that you were
not receiving proper care for a knee condition, and that you did not
suffer from a mental disorder that warranted your discharge. Inthe
absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for duty
by reason of physical disability that was incurred in or aggravated
by your brief period of naval service, and establishes that you should
have been recommended ,for reenlistment and received a more favorable
reentry code than RE-4, the Board was unable to recommend corrective
action in your case. Accordingly, your application has been denied.
he 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,
\ Shans
W. DEAN Pre
Executive ine
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08745-10
You contend that you were given an erroneous A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 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 poliees. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01068-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 January 2011. In addition, the Board noted that although the VA may increase a veteran's disability ratings at any time to reflect changes in the degree of severity of rated conditions, disability determinations made by the military departments are fixed as of the date of the service member’s release from active duty or discharge. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13827-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 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. You served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 29 December 2003 to 28 December 2007, when you were voluntarily released from active duty at the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03743-08
During the period from 26 June. The Board also considered the medical documentation submitted in support of your case. It also appears that your fraud continued when you enlisted in the Army National Guard by obtaining a waiver of your physical disability while serving in the Marine Corps and, by omission of your service in the Navy, which included the diagnosis of a severe personality disorder and nonrecommendation for reenlistment, both resulting in the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05443-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 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 | 05362-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 March 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. 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 | 07898-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 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 | CY2013 | NR8415 13
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. The Board noted that an RE-3P is the most favorable reentry code that may be assigned to individuals who are separated by reason of condition, not a disability, during initial training. : Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05392-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2011. Your receipt of disability compensation from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record. 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 | 04422-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. You were discharged in accordance with the approved findings of the PEB on 31 March 2007. 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.