DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
Docket No. 7352-15 

MAY 2 01016 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC. 1552. 
Although your application was not f iled in a timely manner, the Board found it in t he interest of j ustice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your case on its merits. A three-me.mber panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 April 2016. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the ˇproceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all mat erial submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with t he Navy .on 25 January 2010ˇ. On 11 February 2010, you were diagnosed with reactive ai:rway disease and recommended for separation for failure to meet physical standards for enlistment . On 26 February 2010, you were discharged for erroneous enlistment with an entry l evel separati on. 
The Board carefully considered your arguments that your narrative reason for separation should be changed due to the stigma associated with an erroneous entry and the potential negative impact on your fut ure employment. Unfortunatel y, t he Board did not agree with your rational e for relief. The Board determined you were properly processed for an erroneous enlistment since you possessed a disability that would have prevented your entry into the militar y had it been known by the Navy prior to your enlistment. Your r eactive airway disease was determined to exist prior to your entry and aggravated by the environmental conditions to which you were exposed during your training. The re was no evidence t hat your condition was incurred or aggravated by your brief period of service . Accordingl y, the Board was unable to f ind an error or injustice warranting a correction to your record and denied your application. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 

Regarding your concern about the stigma associated with an erroneous enlistment separation, you'were processed for erroneous enlistment vice fraudulent entry because Naval authorities felt your enlistment was not due to your fraudulent conduct, _i.e. you were determined not to be deceitful in your enlistment application. Ultimately, the Navy made an error in enlisting _you because of a pre-existing disqualifying condition that was unknown to all parties. I hope this alleviates your concerns regarding t he matter. 

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 evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making ˇits decision in this case. In this regard, it i s 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 err or or injustice. 
Sincerely, 

Executive Director