Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07810-06
Original file (07810-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 SMW
 Docket No: 7810-06
 26 January 2007
This is in reference to your application f or 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 24 January 2007. 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.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 24 August 1992 at age 21. On 21 September 1992, while in recruit training, you were diagnosed with shin splints. On 30 October 1992 a medical board found that you had a stress fracture that did not exist prior to enlistment. Your case was then referred to the physical evaluation board (PEB), and on 30 November 1992 you were ordered home to await disposition of your case. On 7 December 1992 the PEB directed separation after finding that you were physically unfit for duty due to the stress fracture. On 14 January 1993 you were separated with an uncharacterized entry level separation by reason of a physical disability.
The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your good service and the fact that your disability was incurred while at recruit training. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant an honorable discharge. In this regard, regulations authorize an entry level
 separation to service members who are discharged during the first 180 days of active duty. Such a separation is uncharacterized and not considered derogatory. Therefore, the Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
                  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,

         ROBERT D Z SALMAN
 Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00602-09

    Original file (00602-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. The MEB established final diagnoses of metatarsalgia and gastroc equinus and recommended that your case be reviewed by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). The Board concluded that your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for eight conditions that were not rated by the PEB is not considered probative of the existence of error or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05346-07

    Original file (05346-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Marine Corps on 19 April 2004. policy.Your receipt of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10723-09

    Original file (10723-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 August 2010. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and desire to change your entry level separation by. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 03617-06

    Original file (03617-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 May 2007. An enlistment is considered erroneous if it would not have occurred had all relevant facts been known by Department of the Navy officials, such as your predisposition to developing ankle pain. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05221-07

    Original file (05221-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 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 | CY2002 | 03507-02

    Original file (03507-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    December 1997, the PEB made preliminary findings that you remained unfit for duty, and that your disability was ratable at 20%. VA code 527 1 provides for a 20% rating for marked limitation of motion of the ankle, and 10% for moderate limitation of motion. 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600175

    Original file (MD0600175.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A: Stress fracture right Femur (illegible) P: Physical Therapy Instructions and Handouts: Ankle Sprain complete treatment with tilt board continued; Contract/Relax buddy stretches adductors; Isometric Quad exercise Ice 2-3 x day (illegible) Duty status: MRP (Protocol UB/Swim/C.C.) Continue with UB protocol until 100% pain free.960426: Medical entry: Sports Medicine Clinic, Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego CA, HM1 K. J. R_, USN: Patient (Applicant) here for 2 week follow up and Eval for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR9393 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR9393 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. You did not respond in a timely manner and were honorably discharged from the TDRL program, and assigned an RE-3P (physical disability) reentry code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant a change in your reentry code given the fact you were offered...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018606

    Original file (20100018606.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A radiographic report prepared on 4 December 1992 states his proximal right tibia had a stress fracture. c. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. Prior to the applicant completing his initial entry training, appropriate medical personnel diagnosed him with a right tibial stress fracture and found him unfit for retention.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500851

    Original file (MD0500851.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION On 20040422, the Applicant’s Commanding Officer recommended to the Commanding General that the Applicant be discharged by convenience of the government-physical condition not a disability. The Applicant's service record did not contain any unusual circumstances during his less than 4 months in the military to warrant a change of discharge to honorable.