DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 7197-01
10 May 2002
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
25 April 2002. Your allegations of error and
session, considered your application on
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 enlisted in the Navy on 20 March 2001. Your left knee became
painful on 1 April 2001, after you completed a one mile run. The pain became chronic,
despite rest, medication and prescribed therapy.
and patello-femoral pain syndrome. You were discharged from the Navy on 17 May
by reason of a condition, not a disability, interfering with your performance of duty.
Following your discharge, you sought care from civilian sources, and it appears that your
condition improved, although it did not completely resolve.
Your condition was assessed as tendinitis
2001
The Board noted that in order to be entitled to disability benefits administered by the
Department of the Navy, a service member must be unfit to perform the duties of his or her
office, grade, rank or rating by reason of a physical disability incurred in or aggravated by
It appears that you were unable to withstand the rigors of recruit training
military service.
because of your knee pain, but not unfit by reason of physical disability. It was therefore
appropriate to separate you without entitlement to disability benefits.
effect that you did not receive
The Board rejected your unsubstantiated contention to the
had no choice but to leave the
proper medical treatment while in the Navy, and that you
Navy. In addition, it noted that even if you had been considered unfit by reason of physical
disability, your condition would not have been rated above 10% disabling, and as you did not
complete at least six months of service, your discharge would have been without entitlement
to disability severance pay or other disability benefits administerd by the Navy.
In view of the foregoing, 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
Jn this
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
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 | 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 | CY2007 | 08398-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 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 | CY2003 | 03396-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 20 March 2002, the Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, Virginia, recommended that you It gave you diagnoses of be discharged from the Navy because of your unsuitability for continued military service due to your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09
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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02440-07
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.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-commissioning physical examination on 12 December 2000, at...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03217-02
A three-~nember panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2002. The medical board report indicates that you had undc:.guw an osteotomy in 1979 to cc)rr'Cd dysplasia of your left hip, and that you had been active in sports and had little difficulty with your hip since that time. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04424-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. condition was incurred in or aggravated by your service, or that your discharge was otherwise erroneous, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04184-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. On 9 June 1997, the PEB found you unfit for duty because of your back pain, which it rated at severance pay. 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 | 00880-00
Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director -- Enclosure i RATIONALE ON 13 SEPTEMBER 1996, A MEDICAL BOARD WAS CONVENED AT THE NAVAL HOSPITAL, CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA IN THE CASE OF THIS 28 YEAR OLD MEMBER WITH THE FOLLOWING DIAGNOSES: (1) CHRONIC INSTABILITY LEFT SHOULDER, 71881 (2) CHRONIC MECHANICAL LOW BACK PAIN, 7242 (3) CHRONIC DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS LEFT KNEE, 71598 (4) SUBLUXATION SPONTANEOUS MANDIBLE, 8300 -- THE RECORD REVIEW PANEL OF THE PHYSICAL ON 15 JANUARY...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03605-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, it considered the comments of your counsel with administrative regulations and procedures Your allegations of error and Documentary material considered by the Board After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that...