Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10603-06
Original file (10603-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

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


JRE
Docket No. 10603-06
12 January 2007

From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy

Subj:    FORMER
OF NAVAL RECORD

Ref:     (a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:     (1) DD Form 149
(2)      Subject’s naval record

1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that he received a reentry code of RE-i. He contends, in effect, that he was discharged because of a knee condition that did not exist. He submits evidence which shows that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded him service connection and a combined disability rating of 20% for bilateral knee arthrosis.

2.       The Board, consisting of Messrs.UfIi~, and
reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on ii January 2007, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

3.       The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:

a.       Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.       Petitioner served on active duty in the Navy from 17 June 1985 to 1 June 1989, when he was discharged by reason of physical disability due to bilateral knee arthrosis, retropatellar pain, right ankle instability, and right ankle arthrosis. He was assigned a reentry code of RE-4, as permitted by governing directives.






CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner has failed to submit sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he was discharged in error because of a non-existent knee condition. In this regard, the Board notes that he was discharged, in part, because of knee arthrosis, and he continues to suffer from that condition, for which receives substantial disability compensation from the VA.

The Board concludes further that Petitioner should have been assigned a reentry code of RE-3P rather than RE-4. Accordingly, it finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action.

RECOMMENDATION:

a.       That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that on 1 June 1989, he was assigned a reentry code of RE-3P, vice RE-
4.

b.       That so much of his request for corrective action as exceeds the foregoing be denied.

c.       That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.

4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.



ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
                                   JAMES EXNICIOUS
Recorder
                                                      Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.



                  W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director









Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07553-00

    Original file (07553-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 TRG Docket No: 23 August 2001 7553-00 From: To: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF Ref: Encl: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments (2) Case Summary (3) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the United States Navy filed enclosure (1) with this Board...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05274-99

    Original file (05274-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected to show that he was not discharged because of osteoporosis, and that his reenlistment code be changed. In the opinion of the orthopedic specialist who evaluated Petitioner, it was unclear whether the latter condition existed prior to Petitioner ’s enlistment, or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12371-09

    Original file (12371-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 | CRS Docket No: 12371-09 18 March 20106 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: FORMER 2 OF NAVAL RECORD Ref: {a) Title 10 U.S.c., 1552 Enel: (1) DD Form 149 (2) Subject's naval record 1. Pursuant to thé provisions of reference (a), Petitioner applied to this Board requesting his naval record be corrected by changing the reentry code he was...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01552

    Original file (PD2012 01552.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the bilateral post-traumatic arthrosis of the ankles condition rating each ankle 10% with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting and determined to be Category 2; conditions that contribute to the unfitting condition but are not separately ratable. The most serious of these issue being my ankle issues, both Left and Right ankles, for which I had surgery while on active duty....

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 10333-05

    Original file (10333-05.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that he was separated or retired by reason of physical disability. and @@@e and Ms. iidiiiie_ xceviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 8 March 2007, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008282

    Original file (20130008282.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    (4) On 26 March 2004, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) considered his bilateral knee pain due to patellofemoral arthritis unfit, existed prior to service and permanently aggravated by an LOD injury on 12 August 2003. (4) His orders show he has 20 years of service and his DD Form 214 states he was discharged with severance pay. The evidence of record shows he later submitted a statement requesting his medical board paperwork be reevaluated to increase his disability rating to 40% for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04422-10

    Original file (04422-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. You were discharged in accordance with the approved findings of the PEB on 31 March 2007. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008734

    Original file (20120008734.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for correction of his record to show he received a medical retirement, nor does it support his request for correction of item 9 of his final DD Form 214 to show he retired with more than 20 years of service. The applicant states the PEB failed to consider the physical profiles he received during his service; however, having had a temporary or permanent physical profile is not evidence of an unfitting condition. The record...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05561-10

    Original file (05561-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected by changing block 27 (Reentry Code) of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) from RE-4 (not recommended for reenlistment) to RE-1 (recommended for retention) or RE-2 (ineligible for reenlistment) . The Board finds that neither an RE-1 nor RE-2 reentry...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002259

    Original file (20140002259.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his military records to show he was retired due to physical disability. A DA Form 3947 (MEB Proceedings), dated in October 2004, reports: a. an MEB convened to evaluate his medical conditions: * Chronic bilateral ankle pain * Severe bilateral pes planus * Bilateral talar avascular necrosis b. all of the evaluated conditions were found to be unacceptable and he no longer met medical retention standards; c. he did not desire to continue on active duty;...