Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11353-10
Original file (11353-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

TUR
Docket No: 11353-10
11 August 2011

 

‘This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 9 August 2011. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
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 29 August 1991 at age 19, began a
period of active duty on 16 March 1992, and served without
disciplinary infraction.

Your record reflects that on 11 February 1993 you were referred
for a medical/mental health evaluation because of a pre-existing
learning disability. During the evaluation you expressed
experiencing anxiety about future situations, being disillusioned
with the Navy, and having inability to properly function in
complex situations. It was determined that you had a long
history of suffering from a learning disability. As a result,
you were diagnosed with a learning disability that

negatively impacted your performance of duty and affected your
ability to function. As such, you were recommended for an
expeditious administrative separation.

As a result of the foregoing, you were notified of administrative
separation by reason of convenience of the government due to
erroneous enlistment. At that time you did not object to the

 

ee
separation and waived your right to submit a rebuttal statement.
Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended discharge by
reason of erroneous enlistment and noted that you were not
recommended for retention or reenlistment. The discharge
authority approved this recommendation and directed your
commanding officer to issue you an honorable discharge by reason
of erroneous enlistment due to a pre-existing learning
disability. On 10 May 1993, while serving in paygrade E-2, you
were so discharged. At that time you were assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth and desire to change your reenlistment code and
narrative reason for separation. Nevertheless, the Board
concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change
in your reenlistment code or narrative reason for separation
because of your pre-existing disability. Further, the Board
concluded that your diagnosed learning disability and
nonrecommendation for reenlistment were sufficient to support the
assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code, which is authorized by
regulatory guidance. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.

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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03972-09

    Original file (03972-09.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 March 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. As a result of the foregoing, you were notified of administrative separation by reason of convenience of the government due to a pre-existing...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04916-01

    Original file (04916-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A psychiatric evaluation in the record states that you were referred by the chaplain for depression, frequent crying, inability to adapt to military life, anger, anxiety, and problems with your family and girlfriend. facts alleged at the time including the alcohol abuse, breaking mirrors, and general unhappiness were fictional and designed to create a picture of distress. He appears have an understanding of the reality Clinical evidence However, pre- The Board noted that the diagnosed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01148-10

    Original file (01148-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 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 | CY2010 | 06128-10

    Original file (06128-10.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 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. The Board concluded that your nonrecommendation for retention, ineligibility for reenlistment due to the diagnosed physical or mental condition,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05451-01

    Original file (05451-01.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. Subsequently, the separation authority directed an entry level separation by reason of erroneous enlistment, September 1999. reenlistment and were assigned an RR-4 reenlistment code. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08004-07

    Original file (08004-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 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. Finally, an RE-4 reenlistment code is authorized and normally assigned when a Sailor is separated by reason of erroneous entry and is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09605-06

    Original file (09605-06.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.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.On 17 August 2000 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 19 September 2000 you received a medical...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07646-10

    Original file (07646-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board may deny an application in executive session if it determines that the evidence of record fails to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. If the petitioner’s fitness is considered questionable by the Board or the author(s) of the medical advisory opinion, the Board or its staff will in most cases seek an advisory opinion from the Director, SECNAVCORB, on the issue of the petitioner’s fitness for duty at the time of his separation or release from active...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05199-10

    Original file (05199-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your . 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 | BCNR | CY2001 | 00574-01

    Original file (00574-01.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three—member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2001. 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...