DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490


Docket No. 4291-18 
Ref: Signature Date 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.  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.  Consequently, your application has been denied. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your case on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 November 2018.  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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 
  
A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in July 2011.  In December 2011, you passed out during a range exercise and were eventually diagnosed with sick sinus syndrome. In August 2012, you suffered a compression fracture to your back.  On 23 April 2013, a medical board referred you to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for your sick sinus syndrome, syncope, lumbar fracture, and left shoulder sprain.  The PEB found you unfit for continued naval service on 10 May 2013 for your sick sinus syndrome and lumbar fracture. They eventually adopted the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) combined disability rating of 20% on 9 September 2013.  You were discharged from active duty consistent with the PEB findings and issued a RE-3P reentry code. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that your reentry code should be changed to RE­1 to allow you to apply for commissioning programs with the Marine Corps.  You assert that the VA may be able to treat your sick sinus condition and that you may have been misdiagnosed.  Unfortunately, the Board disagreed with your rationale for relief. First, the Board felt it had insufficient evidence to conclude your PEB diagnosis and findings contained an error.  While you assert that your sick sinus condition may be treatable, the Board found no evidence in the record to indicate your initial diagnosis was incorrect or that you were not unfit for continued naval service due to your disability conditions.  Therefore, they determined that you were properly issued a RE-3P reentry code which is consistent with the PEB findings in your case.  Second, the Board determined no change was necessary to your reentry code since the RE-3P code is a waivable code. MCO 1900.16 states that the RE-3P code is waivable with Commandant of the Marine Corps authorization.  Based on these findings, the Board determined no error or injustice exists to warrant a change to your record.  

Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new and material evidence.  New evidence is evidence 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,