DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                                           BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00

JRE
Docket No. 02176-06
26 September 2006

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 21 September 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable together 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 16 August 2005. Shortly thereafter, you complained of difficulty breathing, and disclosed that you had a pre-service history of asthma, and that you had last used bronchodilator medication about three months before you enlisted. Your history was confirmed by the results of a methacholine challenge test, and you were discharged by reason of fraudulent entry on 21 September 2005.

The fact that the results of pulmonary function testing (PFT) you underwent several weeks after you were discharged were normal does not demonstrate that your is erroneous. In this regard, the Board noted that symptoms of asthma may wax and wane over time, and that
negative PFT results do not rule-out a diagnosis of asthma. In addition, the Board concluded that either you concealed your history of asthma in order to fraudulently procure your enlistment, or that you concocted a history of asthma in order to fraudulently procured your discharge. In either case, it is clear that you are not suitable for further service, and that a reentry code of RE-4 is appropriate in your case. The Board concluded that it would not be in the interest of justice for it to take any action that might facilitate your reentry into the Armed Forces.

In view of the foregoing, 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 PFEIFFER
Executive Director