Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05140-10
Original file (05140-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 REC
Docket No: 05140-10

16 February 2011

a

 

 

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 16 February 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 11 March 2009, and began a period of
active duty on 18 November 2009. During your initial processing
at the Military Entrance Processing Station, you did not document
that you had ever experienced any chronic pain. However, on

28 December 2009, a medical evaluation was conducted and you
complained that you had chronic pain syndrome located bilateral
epididymalgia. On 4 January 2010, you were notified of pending
administrative separation action by reason of failed medical and
physical procurement standards due to the chronic pain which was
not disclosed. 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 chronic
pain syndrome. 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 6 August 2009, you were discharged with an
uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of failed

medical/physical procurement standards. At that time, you were
assigned a reentry code of RE-4.

The Board in its review of your application, carefully weighted
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire
to reenlist in the armed forces. 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
existed prior to’entry into the service. The Board thus
concluded that there is no error or injustice in your RE-4
reentry code. Aceordingly, 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,

rereuieainne

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2009 | 02853-09

    Original file (02853-09.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 June 2009. 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 material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11177-06

    Original file (11177-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRS Docket No: 11177-06 21 April 2008 This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of title 10 of the United A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2008. On 5 April 2002 you received an entry level separation by...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01601-09

    Original file (01601-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Mr =i DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRS Docket No: 1601-09 8 September 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: FORMER Qi OF NAVAL RECORD . Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting his naval record be corrected by changing the reentry code he was assigned on 19 May 2005. as ieee, and Ms. RB reviewed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00018-10

    Original file (00018-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 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. Consequent fy,” when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04373-09

    Original file (04373-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting his naval record be corrected by changing the reentry code he was assigned on 10 October 2006. The Board, consisting of Messrs@ a reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 6-May 2009 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Accordingly, the Board recommends that Petitioner’s reason for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03424-09

    Original file (03424-09.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 February 2011. In this regard, you were assigned the appropriate 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 pyobable material error or injustice.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600220

    Original file (MD0600220.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The subject named Marine’s (Applicant) evaluation and treatment plan had been reviewed by by Lt L_, Senior Medical Officer, Camp Geiger Branch Medical Clinic.Private G_ (Applicant) is a 20-year-old male with Lumbar Back Strain and Thoracic Back Strain.Private G_ (Applicant) is recommended for administrative separation for Lumbar Back Strain and Thoracic Back Strain which existed prior to entry (EPTE) and was not revealed on the military entrance physical examination at MEPS. The factual...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600715

    Original file (ND0600715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Applicant testified that the above medical condition existed prior to enlistment in the United States Navy. 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 Instruction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08440-10

    Original file (08440-10.pdf) 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. However, the Board concluded that your RE-4 reentry code should not be changed due to your diagnosed visual condition which existed prior to your enlistment. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence...