Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10607-06
Original file (10607-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100


JRE
Docket No. 10607-06
12 January 2007




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 session, considered your application on 11 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 that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In this connection, the Board found that you served on active duty in the Marine Corps Reserve from 11 August 1972 to 10 February 1973. You were discharged from the Marine Corps Reserve on 15 March 1977 after being found not physically qualified for further service because of syncope of undetermined cause. You were not entitled to separation or retirement by reason of physical disability because you were fit for duty when released from active duty in 1973, and the syncope was not incurred or aggravated by your performance of duty in the Marine Corps Reserve. 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 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. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03472-09

    Original file (03472-09.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. The Board concluded that although you experienced an episode of fainting during a Marine Corps Reserve drill period, and that the Department of Veterans Affairs granted you a 0% disability rating for exercise induced hypotension with syncope because of that episode, the Board was not...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 05180-10

    Original file (05180-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2011. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for conditions not rated by the Department of the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty vis-a-vis those conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10641-02

    Original file (10641-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    H A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 2003. 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. You were discharged in accordance with the approved findings and recommendation of the medical board, and your request, on 27 July 1972.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03786-10

    Original file (03786-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 December 2010. 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 | CY2010 | 04772-10

    Original file (04772-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you should have received a disability rating of 30% or higher for syncope, or that you were otherwise entitled to retirement by reason of physical disability, vice separation with entitlement to severance pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09605-06

    Original file (09605-06.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 17 August 2000 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 19 September 2000 you received a medical...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05703-06

    Original file (05703-06.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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on 14 February 1973 at age 19 and began a period of active...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04095-06

    Original file (04095-06.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2007. 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 | CY2009 | 00026-09

    Original file (00026-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 20 April 2007, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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 | CY2009 | 07732-09

    Original file (07732-09.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. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was ineufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...