DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DCG 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 06618-0609
25 January 2010
This is in réference 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 14 January 2010. 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.
You were released from active duty on 17 March 1968 and
transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) the
following day with a disability rating of 40% for residuals of a
combat wound. On 21 March 1973 you were notified by the
Commandant of the Marine Corps that as your disability was
considered permanent and ratable at less than thirty percent,
you would be discharged with entitlement to disability severance
pay effective 31 March 1973. Shortly thereafter, the Veterans
Administration was notified of your discharge and receipt of
disability severance pay.
The Board was not persuaded that you were “pushed out” of the
Marine Corps while you were recovering from wounds as you
contend. As indicated above, you were on the TDRL for five
years, which is the maximum period authorized by law. In
addition, the available records do not demonstrate that you were
suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder at the time of your
release from active duty, that your disability was ratable at
thirty percent or higher as of 31 March 1973, or that you should
have received disability ratings from the Department of the Navy
for any additional conditions.
In view of the foregoing, 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.
Consequentiy, 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01980-09
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 the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you should have received a rating of thirty percent or higher from the Department of the Navy in 1994, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04718-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2001. IN REPLY REFER TO: 1400/3 MMPR-2 13 Mar 01 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF FORMER - ‘ a retired Marine indicates that he completed his he grade of probationary corporal and should have been promoted to the grade of sergeant prior to his retirement from the Marine Corps on 22...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00606-07
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 were released from active duty on 13 June 1980 and transferred to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12476-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 2011. 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 | CY2008 | 12440-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19. The Board concluded that your receipt of disability compensation from the VA for a depressive disorder is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA assigned the disability rating more than thirty years after you were retired, and without regard to your condition as of the date of your retirement. Consequently,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03507-02
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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06453-05
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, you naval eco d and applicable statutes regulations and policiesAfter 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 served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 29 January 1984 to 27 June...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 06738-09
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. As you have not demonstrated that your disability should have been rated at 30% or higher on 31 October 1977, which would have qualified you for continuation on the TDRL or permanent retirement, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10963-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 September 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 | CY2001 | 05545-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 2001. As the Board was not persuaded that the disability rating you were assigned by the Secretary of the Navy is erroneous or unjust, it 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...