DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Y
2
NAW ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No:
22 June 2000
5195-99
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 25 May 2000. 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 reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 May 1982. You were
convicted by special court-martial on 30 November 1983, and reduced from staff sergeant
(E-6) to sergeant ( E-5). You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 6
February 1984, and were found physically qualified for discharge. You indicated that your
health was good at that time, and you did not report any conditions which you felt rendered
you unfit for duty. You were discharged from the Marine Corps at your own request on 16
March 1984, because you did not want to remain in the Marine Corps at the grade to which
you had been reduced by court-martial.
The Board concluded that your receipt of a 10% disability rating from the Veterans
Administration (VA), effective 17 March 1984, is not probative of error or injustice in your
case. In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigns disability ratings to conditions it
classifies as “service connected”, without regard to the issue of fitness to perform military
duty. Although you were treated for a number of conditions during your career in the
Marine Corps, you were considered fit for duty at the time of your discharge, and there is no
indication in your record that you were unable to perform your duties. Accordingly, 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10767-08
oe A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2009. You did not complete any Reserve drilis or active duty service after that date. 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 | CY2003 | 05954-03
Osgood- In this regard, The Board noted that your receipt of a disability benefits from the VA does not demonstrate that your discharge from the Marine Corps was erroneous. As you have not demonstrated that any of the conditions rated by the VA, either separately or in combination with others, rendered you unfit for duty at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04090-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2010. In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigned ratings to the lumbosacral strain and radiculopathy without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform military duty prior to your discharge, and that the rating you received for a mood disorder was based on your condition more than eighteen months after you were discharged from...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06064-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2003. The fact that the VA has given you a disability for the residuals of your knee injury is not probative of error or injustice in your military record, because the VA awards disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03521-00
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. Reference (a) requests an advisory opinion on former Sergeant equest to have his records corrected to show that he was not discharged from the Marine Corps on 27 May 1999, and to further show that he is retired by reason of physical disability. MMEA concurs with the recommendation made by Mrs. Jr., Head, Separation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06187-99
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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 17 and 31 March 2000, copies of which are attached. Branch (RAM-5) reenlisted Staff Sergeant Marine Corps Reserve at the rank of staff sergeant with his enlistment date (980218) as his date of rank.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05684-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2006. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where a service member has been found unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05157-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2000. 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. You were wounded in action on 26 December 1968, and awarded the Purple Heart on 5 January 1969.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01304-08
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. The VA denied your request for service connection for nine other conditions. 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 | CY2002 | 04434-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 August 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance applicable to the proceedings of this 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...