DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX .
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
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 3 June
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. In addition, the
Board considered the enclosed advisory opinion dated 14 August 2009
provided by the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
after careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record,
the Board found that the evidence submitted was jnsufficient To
establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. In
this connection, the Board concurred with the contents of the
advisory opinion concerning the propriety of your reentry code of
RE-3P,.
With regard to your request for disability separation or retirement,
the Board found that you were discharged on 8 March 1995 due to painful
flat feet, a condition, not a disability, that interfered with your
performance of duty. There ig no indication in the available records
that you suffered from pernicious anemia or any other condition or
disorder that rendered you unfit for further service by reason of
physical disability. 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,
Lo Nea)
W. DEAN P FF
Executive erior
Enclosure
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05968-03
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 in addition, it considered the enclosed advisory opinion from the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards, and your response...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08032-07
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 enlisted in the Navy on 4 October 2000. The VA denied your request for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01166-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 March 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 | 10964-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 March 2011. The Board carefully considered your contentions to the effect that the provisions of MILPERSMAN section 1910-120 were not properly applied in your case and that your request for counsel was improperly denied. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09198-08
09198-08 19 November 2009 FeS ee A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 November 2009. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Censequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08032-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2008. The Board concluded that your receipt of a combined disability rating of 10% from the VA does not demonstrate that your discharge from the Navy by reason of a condition, not a disability, is erroneous or unjust. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade,rank, or rating, there is no basis for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02676-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. In addition, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) that considered your case on 18 August 2005 found you fit for duty. 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 | 06657-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. The Board also noted that on 17 June 2003 the VA was notified that you had been discharged from the naval service without entitlement to disability severance pay. The Board concluded that the presence of your address in documents the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provided to the Marine Corps did not relieve you of the responsibility of ensuring...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12002-08
In this regard, the Board concluded that the establishment of a more definitive diagnosis of your disability more than. The Board concluded that granting your request would not accord you effective relief because the requested action would mot affect the dissbility rating of 100% you were assigned by the Department of the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00306 12
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. Your condition was classified as “Condition, Not a Disability” and you were given an SPD code of “JFV” on your DbD214. 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.