DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 2766-00
4 April 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 29 March 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.
In this regard, the Board found that you were discharged by reason of physical
disability, with entitlement to severance pay of
approved findings of the Physical Evaluation Board. You were issued, and signed, a DD
Form 214 on that date which reflected your discharge. Although it is unfortunate that you
were erroneously given a military identification card with an expiration date in 1999, as well
1910/27, dated 20 June 1994, which authorized you to proceed home
as a NAVEPERS Form
awaiting transfer to the Temporary Disability Retired List, those actions did not create an
entitlement to disability retirement.
$37,704.00, on 25 July 1994, pursuant to the
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you should have received a disability
rating of 30% or higher at the time of your discharge from the Navy, there is no basis for
granting your request. 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
circum(stances 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.
If you believe you should have been transferred to the inactive status list to await retired pay
at age 60, in lieu of being discharged by reason of physical disability, you should submit a
new application. Please be advised, however, that correction of your record to show that
you transferred to the inactive status list will create an immediate indebtedness for the full
amount of the severance pay you received in 1994.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant, a member of the Air Force Reserve, was processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES) when her disability case was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) in December 1999, for a diagnosis of dysthymic disorder. Counsel provided a statement supporting the applicant’s requests to change the IG findings; credit satisfactory service to 20 plus years; change the AF...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05606-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 SJN Docket No: 05606-09 29 July 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. (a), Petitioner, a former officer of the Marine Corps Reserve, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that her record be ~ corrected to show that she transferred to the Retired Reserve list vice being discharged on 1...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02074-00
record (page 9) shows that for the period 11 March 1994 to 31 January 1995, you received an overall 3.6 performance evaluation. for the reenlistment of individuals who are discharged from the TDRL if they are otherwise qualified. 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 | CY2001 | 05543-00
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 findings of the PEB were mailed to you at your last On 8 June In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was ratable at 40% or higher at the time of your discharge, and that you were compliant with medical advice, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07390-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. However, at the end of your anniversary year, on 10 October 1968, you were only credited with 37 retirement points. Therefore, at the end of the 10 October 1970 anniversary year you were only credited with 19 retirement points.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10963-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 September 2008. 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 | CY2009 | 01980-09
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 the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you should have received a rating of thirty percent or higher from the Department of the Navy in 1994, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500554
The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. “I served honorably from January 16, 2001 thru June 30, 2004 when I received a disability separation. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
The United States Air Force (USAF) be ordered to submit an f duty (LOD) explanation as to why it denied report entered -by th Air National for the emotional condition suffered while on active His disability rating be adjusted to one of not less than 30 3 . On 22 January 1997, the Secretary of the Air Force directed that applicant be separated from active service for physical disability under the provision of 10 USC 1203, with severance Pay On 29 January 1997, the applicant was notified that...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00283-01
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 21 March 2001 and undated, copies of which are attached. References (b) through (d) refer to clinical studies on head injury and multiple sclerosis. '_s request to have his records corrected to show that he was retired from the Marine Corps by reason of "combat related" physical disability in the rank of major.