DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 12170-08
19 March 2009
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 5 March 2009. 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.
The Board found that you reenlisted in the Marine Corps on 11
December 1971. You underwent a pre-separation physical
examination on 26 April 1978, and were found qualified for
separation; however, the physician who conducted the examination
determined that you were not qualified for enlistment in the
Marine Corps Reserve because of obesity. You were discharged
from the Marine Corps on 10 May 1978. Despite the disqualifying
condition noted during your pre-separation physical, you were
permitted to reenlist in the Marine Corps Reserve on 11 May 1978
For a period of two years. You underwent a reenlistment
physical examination on 13 April 1980, and were noted to be
overweight by twenty pounds, and have mildly elevated blood
pressure. You were found not physically qualified because of
your overweight condition. On 10 May 1982, you were honorably
discharged by reason of expiration of obligated service.
Although you had mildly elevated blood pressure on 13 April
1980, you were within retention physical standards at that time,
and would have qualified for reenlistment in the Marine Corps
Reserve had you been within applicable weight standards. The
Board could not find any indication in the available records
that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your
office, grade, rank or rating because of hypertension or any
other condition on the date of your discharge. 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,
led Dog)!
W. DEAN PF
Executive r or
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 03853-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01332-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 June 2000. You denied a history of psychiatric symptoms or treatment on the front side of the form, and disclosed a history of counseling for “normal teenage rebellion” on the reverse side. 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 | CY2002 | 06293-02
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-510 0 JRE Docket No: 6293-02 24 September 2002 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: Ref: Encl: FORMER REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD (a) 10 U.S.C. He recommended that a waiver of physical standards not be granted. The Board noted that a service member found fit for In Accordingly, he should have been In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08355-01
In this regard, the E3oard noted that the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, whereas the military departments rate only those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty. The Board concluded that had the PEB had found your arthritis to be unfitting as of 1 October 1994, it is unlikely that you would have received a substantial rating for that condition, because substantial deductions would have been taken from the rating for...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00046
The arrest report revealed a blood pressure reading of 200/140 at the time of the arrest. Review of the service medical records revealed that the applicant was placed in an alcohol rehabilitation program 10 Nov 81. The applicant's alcohol use during the last two years of service is well documented in the service medical records from the Alcoholism Rehabilitation Center at Sheppard AFB, in addition to reports from his commander of two civilian arrests for alcohol abuse, one for public...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02241-09
A, ; A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your | application on 1 October 2009. You were discharged under other than honorable conditions on 24 January 1985, by reason of your frequent. ‘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 | CY2008 | 03290-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 March 2009. 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...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00032
Although the MEB and PEB listed the left knee as unfitting, the orthopedic surgery NARSUM, physical profile, and treatment records are clear that the unfitting knee was the right knee, not the left knee. There was no evidence for concluding that the left knee condition interfered with duty performance to a degree that could be argued as unfitting and subject to service disability rating. While the Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating...
A copy of this letter is at Exhibit F. On 4 November 2002, the applicant requested that her case be temporarily withdrawn (See Exhibit G). Additionally, although hypertension is listed on the death certificate and the former member’s retirement physical examination documents a mildly elevated blood pressure, there is no evidence indicating hypertension was diagnosed or treated while on active duty. Neither does the record reveal, nor has the applicant provided any evidence that would...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057759C070420
APPLICANT STATES : That he should have received a complete physical examination before being discharged from the Army Reserves. The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve for 6 years on 16 May 1977. The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve for 3 years on 22 August 1992.