Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 13757-10
Original file (13757-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 13757-10
19 January 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 5 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.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 18 July 2008.

On 2 September 2008 your commanding officer directed your
separation due to failure to disclose a history of knee pain. On
9 September 2008 you received an entry level separation by reason
of fraudulent entry and were assigned a reentry code of RE-4.

 

The Board noted that a reentry code of RE-4 is required by
regulatory guidance to be assigned to service members separated
by reason of fraudulent entry. Since you have been treated no
differently than others in your situation, the Board could not
find an error or injustice in the assignment of your reentry
code.

The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the
effect that your recruiter told you to conceal information about
your knee pain. Accordingly, and as you have not demonstrated
that it would be in the interest of justice for the Board to
change your reentry code as an exception to policy, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon my 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. offieial 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 PFEI
Executive Di ~

 

bo

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01329-11

    Original file (01329-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November. 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 | CY2011 | 05826-11

    Original file (05826-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2011. It wag determined that your lack of properly disclosing information warranted assigning of a reentry code of RE-4 for fraudulent entry into the military. 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 | 06935-10

    Original file (06935-10.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 April 2011. The diagnosis of your knee condition was changed to chondromalacia patella (CMP), and you were recommended for discharge because knee pain which interfered with your ability to perform your duties as a recruit. 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 | 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.

  • 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 | 04814-09

    Original file (04814-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX HIN 70- WAS GTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No: 4814-09 15 Gune 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Sub}: FORMER qq me: REVIEW OF .NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Enel: (1) DD Form 149 (2) Subject's naval record 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference {a), -Petitioner applied to this Board requesting her naval record be corrected by changing the basis for her...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01503-08

    Original file (01503-08.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 October 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 | CY2007 | 02076-07

    Original file (02076-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 20 March 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03617-06

    Original file (03617-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 May 2007. An enlistment is considered erroneous if it would not have occurred had all relevant facts been known by Department of the Navy officials, such as your predisposition to developing ankle pain. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 10091-10

    Original file (10091-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ‘A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 July 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...