DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
JRE
Docket No. 10641-02
6 May ''003
I
This is in reference to your application for corr ction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 0 of the
United States Code, section 1552.
H
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 May 2003. Your allegations of e ror and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with admini trative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proc edings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Bo. rd consisted
of your application, together with all material silbmitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
I
After careful and conscientious consideration of ;he entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitt+d was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on .!7 July 1972.
You appeared before a medical board on 7 May 1973, and were
given a diagnosis of syncopal episodes. The medi:al board
report indicates that you disclosed that you began experiencing
syncopal episodes about eighteen months earlier, prior to your
enlistment. Accordingly, your condition was classified as
existed prior to enlistment (EPTE), and not aggravated by
service. As the episodes did not appear to be se-brere, the
medical board recommended that you be placed on l~mited duty for
a period of six months. On 7 May 1973, you decliiled to submit a
statement in rebuttal to the findings and recommeltdation of the
1 c a l L
1 1 I
L on I
i t ,
1 .
L -
1
I
L
-
I
-
had three more syncopal episodes, and were referred to a second
medical board. That Board, which met on 12 July 1973,
determined that you were not fit for duty, and rezommended that
you be discharged without entitlement to disability benefits
administered by the Department of the Navy. After being advised
of the finding and recommendation of the medical board, you
declined to submit a statement in rebuttal theretn. In
addition, you waived your right to appear before physical
evaluation board, and requested that you be dischirged as soon
as possible, without entitlement to disability benefits. You
were discharged in accordance with the approved findings and
recommendation of the medical board, and your request, on 27
July 1972. Following your discharge, the Department of Veterans
Affairs denied your request for service connectio2 for syncopal
episodes.
The Board rejected your unsubstantiated contention that you did
not suffer from syncopal episodes prior to your enlistment. As
indicated above, you previously admitted that the episodes began
before you enlisted in the Navy. Accordingly, yonr 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 ,::onsidered :by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to ke.?p 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 d.:?monstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Diret:tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07708-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2002. 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. Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge, narrative reason for separation, and reenlistment code were proper and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09807-02
Documentary material considered by the Bocird consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was modified and on 11 January 1973 you received a general discharge by reason of unfitness due to substandard personal behavior. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00848-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 June 2002. On 10 October 1991 you were notified that separation action was being initiated by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment, as evidenced by the diagnosis of enuresis. 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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01732-02
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, and the record of the two previous reviews of your application by the Board. In addition, the Board considered an advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 1 May 2002, a copy of which is attached. An SNMHAS record entry dated 12 August 1987 indicates...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06606-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 March 2002. 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 | 04766-03
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. Due to administrative error, your DD Form 214 indicates that you were both discharged from the Marine Corps and retired by reason of physical disability on that date. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07315-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Regulations authorize the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code to individuals separated by reason of a diagnosed personality disorder. Absent such evidence, the Board concluded that the reason for discharge and separation code were appropriate.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07314-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 March 2002. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You enlisted in the Navy on 3 August 1994 for four years at age 18.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00602
The PEB adjudicated the condition as vasodepressor syncope associated with seizure activity, and found the condition unfitting, rated 10%, IAW the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board concurs with the PEB decision to code the CI’s syncope condition as analogous to code 8210, paralysis of the tenth (vagus) cranial nerve, since several of the CI’s syncopal and presyncopal episodes had no associated seizure activity, and neurological evaluation and...