DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
NAVY
ANNEX
2
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
S
JRE
Docket No:
12 February 2002
4011-01
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 7 February 2002.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
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.
Your allegations of error and
Documentary material considered by the Board
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 rejected your wife ’s unsubstantiated contentions to the effect that your records
were falsified, that false charges were filed against you to cover up your injuries, that you
did not receive correct pay and allowances while you were on active duty, that you were
a complete functional person ” at that time, and that you were unable to hold a job following
your release from active duty because of your alleged disabilities. The Board noted that
although you sustained severe injuries during March 1969, you were not unconscious or in a
coma as you allege, and you recovered without disabling residuals effects. You were found
fit for duty by a medical board on 22 June 1970, and you declined to submit a statement in
rebuttal to that finding. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 3
December 1970, and were found fit for release from active duty. You did not disclose any
conditions at that time which you felt rendered you unfit for duty, despite being admonished
to do so if you felt that you suffered from any such conditions. You were not recommended
for reenlistment’on 8 December 1970, because you were disqualified from reenlisting
because of your low educational level, not because of your medical or physical condition. In
addition, the Board noted that on 11 August 1970, you advised career planning personnel that
“not
you wanted to get out of the service, because it didn
’t “do anything” for you.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit to perform the duties of
your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability at the time of your release
from active duty, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and votes of the members of the
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 | CY2002 | 00113-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. The Board found that on 21 November 1994, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of an Ll burst fracture, rated at 30%) and a left acetabular fracture and a coccygeal injury, rated together at 30%) for a combined rating of 50%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04372-02
your back condition to Navy or Marine Corps officials after you underwent spinal disc surgery in 1990. The Board noted that although you suffered acute exacerbations of your back condition during periods of military duty in 1997 and 1999, you did not sustain any significant trauma to your spine during those , and there was permanent aggravation of the preexisting periods, you were not “injured” The exacerbations of your condition, one condition during those periods of military duty. VASRD...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12362-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 February 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 04458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. As noted above, you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and you accepted that finding, which suggests that you felt that you were fit for duty at that time. 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 | 05132-00
The member had a board of flight surgeons in disability from the VA for a "spinal disc but the member complained of It must be noted The member appealed that The member has been The member testified that all his fitness reports were in the top 1% until he stopped drilling in March 1997. that his cessation of drilling status was secondary to his neck surgery. during which time the member was not on active duty in This is consistent with the member's having been there was no opportunity for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00290-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were not physically qualified for release from active duty on 2 October 2008, or that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 27 May 2009, when you were discharged by reason of physical fitness assessment failure, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03328-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. found fit for duty immediately prior to your release from active duty in the Navy, and as you have not persuaded the Board that you were, in fact, unfit for duty, it was unable to recommend any corrective action in your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01794-04
01794-04 13 August 2004This 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 July 2004. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10935-07
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. As you have not demonstrated that any of those additional conditions rendered you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00093-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs recently awarded him disability ratings for hearing loss (O%), tinnitus (lo%), and residuals of a head injury (10%) is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in his Navy record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of his fitness for military service in 1963....