DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 3599-02
24 February 2003
This is in reference to your request for further consideration of 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 16
January 2003. 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. In addition, it considered the
advisory opinion rendered by the President, Central Physical
Evaluation Board, dated 26 January 1984.
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 connection, it substantially concurred with the comments
contained in the advisory opinion. It was unable to conclude that your
failure to perform your duties satisfactorily during your final
enlistment was related to the effect of undiagnosed post traumatic
stress disorder, rather than a personality disorder, or that you were
ufit by reason of physical disability at that time. 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
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM
BALLSTON TOWER 92, SUITE 905 801 NORTH RANDOLPH STREET
ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22203
In Reply Refer To
CPEB: sh
26 Jan 1984
From: President, Central Physical Evaluation Board
To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
Via: Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards
Subj:
comments and recommendation In case of
Ref: (a) BCNR ltr 4569-83 of 5 December 1983
End: (1) BCNR File
(2) Service Record
(3) Medical Records received from the VA
1. In response to reference (a), the above enclosures have been
carefully reviewed by this Board.
2. The petitioner requests that his discharge be changed to show he was
discharged by reason of physical disability.
3. A review of the available records discloses that while on active duty
the petitioner received medical treatment on a number of occasions, and on
each occasion, was returned to full duty. The petitioner, in his
application to BCNR, mentions a nervous condition, low back problem, and a
high frequency hearing loss.
4. The petitioner’s medical record discloses his hearing was within the
normal acceptable range for speech and consequently not unfitting. There
are several entries in the petitioner’s medical record that refer to back
problems. He was hospitalized at Naval Hospital, Long Beach on 26 April
1978 for treatment and was discharged on 1 May 1978, fit for duty, with the
diagnosis:
“Acute Lumbosacral Strain”.
5. The medical record also discloses the petitioner was admitted to
Naval Hospital, Long Beach, on 28 December 1979 and discharged on 11
February 1980 with the diagnosis: “Passive-Aggressive Personality
Disorder”. The medical history indicates the petitioner felt he was unable
to wear the uniform and did not desire to return to his duty station even
after he was counseled about the consequences of such an action. The
petitioner appeared before a Medical Board on 13 February 1980 with the
above diagnosis and that Board found no evidence of psychosis or disabling
neurosis, The Medical Board did find him “unfit” by reason of the
Personality disorder, a condition not constituting a physical disability,
and recommended he be discharged from active service.
6. It is the opinion of the Central Physical Evaluation Board (CPEB)
that the petitioner’s discharge by reason of unsuitability in accordance
with MARCORSEPMA& paragraph 6016.lb and BUMED
INSTRUCTION 1910.2g was the appropriate administrative process.
7. Since the petitioner did not exhibit evidence of any medically
unfitting condition upon which to base a physical disability, the CPEB
recommends that the petition before the BCNR be denied insofar as
disability benefits administered by the U.S. Marine Corps are
concerned.
8. Enclosures (1) through (3) are returned.
Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps
Marine Corps Member
Captain, U. S. Navy
Navy Member
Captain, MC, U.. S. Navy
Medical Member
Captain, U.S. Marine Corps
Recorder
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02433-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 December 2008. The VA granted you a disability rating of 10% for a hiatal hernia with psychophysiological gastrointestinal disorder, history of peptic ulcer, history of cholecystectomy; and a separate 10% rating for migraine headaches. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02561-98
The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) granted you service connection for post traumatic stress disorder in 1997, effective from 23 August 1994, was not considered probative of error or injustice in your naval record. prior to your discharge were related to a personality disorder, which is a condition not covered by the military disability evaluation system, rather than a physical disability. It appears likely that the diagnosis made with all information would be PTSD and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02665-02
1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Shy, and Ms. 1 . Furthermore, the Board concluded that his extensive combat service and his proficiency and conduct marks warrant a fully honorable characterization of service, and are sufficient to outweigh his brief period of misconduct. That any material directed to be removed from Petitioner's naval record...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00432-99
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 2 December 1988, the Commander, Naval Medical Command, notified the Commandant of the Marine Corps, in effect, that your history of heat stroke was not a physical disability, and that if that condition continued to interfere with your performance of duty, administrative discharge should be considered. Consequently, when applying for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07101-00
The diagnosis of Delusional Disorder, Paranoid Type, was thus established at this evaluation. The petitioner's psychological evaluations consistently reported that no delusions were present. However, this does not SUBJ: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN CASE OF mean the condition was also present at the time they were diagnosed solely as Personality Disorder.
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2002-056
On April 25, 1973, the Chief Counsel reviewed the report of the CPEB and stated that, to be consistent with his April 17th determination about the findings of the Board of Investigation, he could not agree with the CPEB’s conclusion that the applicant’s injuries were caused by “misconduct.” However, he stated, since the applicant was AWOL at the time and his injuries were clearly not incurred in the line of duty, there was no impediment to his being discharged without severance pay or...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 08057-98
to your accident, 21 June to 7 July and 20 July to 5 August 1978. The second NJP was for the two periods of UA prior The first was for two periods of Punishment On 15 December 1978, CMC directed your transfer to the Marine Corps Barracks at Camp Pendleton, CA for six months of limited duty. The record also reflects that you A $50 forfeiture was On 18 June 1979 a medical board found you unfit for full duty and opined that this status would not change with further treatment.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00437-03
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 Board found that you served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 17 October 1983 to 23 June 1986, when you were discharged by reason of physical disability, with entitlement to severance pay, because of a left ankle condition. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01180-07
Specifically, the panel of the Board that considered your case was not persuaded you were issued the silencing order described in your application, that you suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder while serving on active duty in the Navy, or that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability prior to your separation from the Navy. Two other survivors of the Liberty attack have applied for correction of their naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06881-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. The recommendations of the medical board were to attempt to control the cluster headaches through medication and a six month period of limited duty. Additionally the Board considered the statements of your commanding officer concerning his investigation, your personal letter written concerning your positive urinalysis test and the fact that you were...