Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 03853-00
Original file (03853-00.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                    BOARD OR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                2 NAVY ANNEX
                          WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



                                                         JRE
                                                        Docket No: 3853-00
                                                        5 June 2001







           Dear



     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 17 May
     2001. 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 underwent a pre-separation physical
     examination on 26 October 1951, and were found physically qualified
     for separation, notwithstanding a minimal elevation of your blood
     pressure. The Board noted that the mere existence of elevated blood
     pressure readings does not render a service member unfit for duty. As
     a general rule, a service member will not be referred for disability
     evaluation unless his diastolic pressure remains above 110 mm of
     mercury despite medical treatment. Your blood pressure readings did
     not reach that threshold, and there was no basis for referring you for
     disability evaluation. In addition, the Board noted that you were
     eligible for reenlistment, and could have reenlisted had you wanted
     to, pspecially as the Korean Conflict was at its height at that time.

     In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit for
     duty at the time in question, the Board was unable to r commend any
     corrective action in your case. Accordingly, your application has b n
     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 th 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

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12170-08

    Original file (12170-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2009. You were discharged from the Marine Corps on 10 May 1978. 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 | CY2007 | 09891-07

    Original file (09891-07.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 August 2008. Your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on the date of your discharge from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03290-08

    Original file (03290-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2009. 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 | CY2002 | 06293-02

    Original file (06293-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 JRE Docket No: 6293-02 24 September 2002 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: Ref: Encl: FORMER REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) 10 U.S.C. He recommended that a waiver of physical standards not be granted. The Board noted that a service member found fit for In Accordingly, he should have been In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08355-01

    Original file (08355-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this regard, the E3oard noted that the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, whereas the military departments rate only those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty. The Board concluded that had the PEB had found your arthritis to be unfitting as of 1 October 1994, it is unlikely that you would have received a substantial rating for that condition, because substantial deductions would have been taken from the rating for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02241-09

    Original file (02241-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A, ; A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 1 October 2009. You were discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 January 1985, by reason of your frequent. ‘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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00046

    Original file (BC-2006-00046.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The arrest report revealed a blood pressure reading of 200/140 at the time of the arrest. Review of the service medical records revealed that the applicant was placed in an alcohol rehabilitation program 10 Nov 81. The applicant's alcohol use during the last two years of service is well documented in the service medical records from the Alcoholism Rehabilitation Center at Sheppard AFB, in addition to reports from his commander of two civilian arrests for alcohol abuse, one for public...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01332-01

    Original file (01332-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 June 2000. You denied a history of psychiatric symptoms or treatment on the front side of the form, and disclosed a history of counseling for “normal teenage rebellion” on the reverse side. 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.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00630

    Original file (PD2009-00630.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    Although no treatment record diagnosis of hypertension (HTN) was found in the records available to the Board, the MEB physical note indicated medication for blood pressure and the VA records indicated a diagnosis of HTN while in service in 2006 while on active duty. The Board deliberated what the CI’s HTN would rate under code 7101 (required for consideration in rating renal disease) and considered the evidence of likely in-service labile HTN, and that the VA HTN exam three months post...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09

    Original file (07721-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...