DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR C O R R E C T I O N O F NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
I
JRE
Docket No. 03148-03
2 Mav 2003
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.
t
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction ) f Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 1 May 2003. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with admini.;trative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Bo7ird consisted
of your application, together with all material sitbmitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration or rne entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submittfy!d was
insufficient to establish the existence of probab.;~ material
error or injustice.
The Board found that you served in the Navy from !! to 29 March
2000, when you were discharged by reason of failwe to meet
medical/physical procurement standards because of bilateral
tarsalcalcaneal consolidation, with arthritic char;ges. That
condition caused foot pain and rendered you incapable of
completing military training. You were assigned c reenlistment
code of RE-4, as required by governing directives
The Board rejected your unsubstantiated contentioL to the effect
that the foot pain that resulted in your discharge was caused by
improperly sized boots. The fact that the condition is no
!-nyer symp+nm3tic was considered insufficient to demonstrate
that you discharge was erroneous. Although the Bdard
appreciates your strong desire to serve your country, it was not
persuaded that it should take any action that wou-Ld facilitate
your reentry into the Armed Forces. 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 ca.;e are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are e:ltitled 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 ke.?p in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of ail official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFI
Executive Direr
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10312-02
d. Petitioner was released from active duty and discharged from the Navy on 28 February 2002, and he accepted a commission in the Naval Reserve. That Petitioner's naval record be further corrected to show that on 30 May 2002, while he was entitled to receive basic pay, the Secretary of the Navy found him unfit to perform the duties of grade by reason of physical disability due to migraine headaches, and status/post Lisfranc fracture, left foot, which were incurred while Petitioner was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00662-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2003. 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 | CY2001 | 05634-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 February 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 | 03072-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2003. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 8 April 2003, a copy of which is attached. The Board did not consider whether your characterization of service or reason for separation should be changed, since you did not ask for such consideration and you have not exhausted your administrative remedy...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 02328-03
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. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps dated 11 March 2003, a copy of which is attached. 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 | 02964-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction >f Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2 0 0 3 . After careful and conscientious consideration or m e entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of prob~hle material error or injustice. You were assigned a reenlistment code of RE-3T, to indicatz that you did not meet applicable weight standards at that time.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02038-02
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Headquarters Marine Corps, dated 11 April 2002, a copy of which is attached. 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. In view of the above facts, there is no basis for expungement of his military record.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10441-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2003. After review by the discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and on 14 August 1970 you received an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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 | 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 | CY2003 | 04790-03
In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PEW), dated 2 June 2003, a copy of which is attached. (6), concerning section A, item 8b (physical fitness test (PFT)) of the fitness report form, says "Use code 'NMED' [not medically qualified] if the MRO warine reported on] is unable to take or pass the PFT because of a physical (medical) condition." The "NMED" entry in Item 8b of the fitness report, whi.ch is further...