Dear : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found that 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 application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2020.  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. 
 
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 issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 20 April 1998.  On your pre-enlistment medical paperwork, you fully disclosed your blood pressure issues.  BUMED recommended a medical waiver and on 24 March 1998,  approved your medical waiver.  While you were still in initial recruit training, on 7 May 1998 a Navy Medical Officer diagnosed you with hypertension and noted that your condition was not correctable to meet Navy standards.  The Medical Officer noted in your medical record that you did have a waiver to enlist. 
 
On 8 May 1998, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to an erroneous enlistment.  The factual basis for the separation recommendation was your medical condition of hypertension (elevated blood pressure) that 
existed prior to entry into the Navy.  You elected not to consult with counsel or submit a written rebuttal statement for consideration by the separation authority, and waived your right to General Court-Martial Convening Authority review of your discharge.  On 14 May 1998, you were discharged from the Navy with an uncharacterized entry level separation (ELS), and assigned a separation code of “JFW” and an “RE-4” reentry code.  The “JFW” separation code corresponds to:  “failed medical/physical procurement standards,” and is the appropriate designation in erroneous enlistment cases involving a pre-existing medical condition such as yours that interfered with the performance of duty.  In this regard, you were assigned the correct characterization, separation code, and reentry code based on your factual situation as you were still within your first 180 days of continuous military service and had not yet completed boot camp. 
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contentions that included, but were not limited to:  (a) your enlistment was not erroneous nor dishonorable by any means, (b) you did not omit anything to your recruiters, (c) that the separation code “JFW” suggests you lied to the government and didn’t have an approved waiver, (d) you didn’t realize the detriment this has caused you while attempting to obtain government employment, (e) you were never told you were discharged for lying, and (f) that you have been denied opportunities due to the JFW separation code, which displays unworthiness.  However, the Board concluded these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant changing your separation code, narrative reason for separation, reentry code, or discharge characterization. 
 
The Board agrees that you fully disclosed your blood pressure issues and history during the recruiting process and properly obtained a medical waiver to enlist.  However, the Board disagreed with your contention that your separation code suggests that you were dishonest, deceptive, or lied during the enlistment process.  As mentioned above, the “JFW” separation code is appropriately used for certain erroneous enlistment cases.  Moreover, in the Naval Military Personnel Manual (MILPERSMAN), the erroneous enlistment provisions expressly state:  “A member may be separated on the basis of erroneous enlistment, reenlistment, induction, or extension of enlistment when…[t]he enlistment was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of [the] member…” (emphasis added).  Nothing about your basis for separation or your separation code suggests you were dishonest.  Conversely, per the MILPERSMAN, a fraudulent enlistment occurs when a member falsely represents or deliberately conceals any qualifications or disqualifications prescribed by law, regulation, or orders.  You were not separated on the basis of a fraudulent enlistment given your full disclosure of all relevant medical history.  Typical Navy separation codes for fraudulent entry cases are: “GDA,” “HDA,” or “JDA.”  In the end, the Board concluded that you received the correct discharge characterization, narrative reason for separation, separation code, and reentry code based on the totality of your circumstances, and that such action was in accordance with all Department of the Navy directives and policy at the time of your discharge. 
 
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 the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or 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,

7/9/2020