DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 12607-09
9 August 2010
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 29 July
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 enlisted in the Marine Corps on 21 February 2004. You underwent
a pre-separation physical examination on 13 December 2007 and were
found physically qualified for separation notwithstanding your
history of type II diabetes mellitus and lumbago. You were released
from active duty on 20 February 2008 and assigned a reentry code of
RE-3c. Among the factors which may have contributed to the assignment
of that reentry code are your thirty-two days of time lost, receipt
of nonjudicial punishment, and apparent failure to conform to
applicable body composition standards.
Your receipt of disability ratings from the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) for diabetes, a rash, a cyst, and lumbago 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. As you have not demonstrated that
you were unfit for duty on 20 February 2008, the Board was unable
to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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
errer or injuctice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN P
Executive Wikector
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05589-09
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted o£ 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 you were unfit for duty on 1 July 1995 because of the back condition and/or the diabetes mellitus, and that you should have received a combined disability rating from the Department of the Navy of 30% or higher, the Board was unable to recommend corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07922-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04533-07
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 Marine Corps on 7 December 1998. You were assigned a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04587-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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 | CY2009 | 00171-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | 04280-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1” February 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 | 02149-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2008. You were released from active duty on 17 March 2006, and discharged from the USMCR on 6 December 2006 at the expiration of your enlistment. 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 | 00751-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 March 2010. Your receipt of disability rating from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty as of the date of your release from active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05069-02
As you have not demonstrated that your sleep apnea condition was ratable above 10%, or that any of your other conditions rendered you unfit for duty, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action. THE HEARING WAS RECONVENED ON 3 SEPTEMBER 1996 WITH COUNSEL FOR THE MEMBER BUT WITHOUT THE MEMBER BEING PRESENT, AT WHICH TIME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS SUBMITTED, INCLUDING THE NEUROPSYCHOLOGIC EVALUATION REPORT AND A SHOWERS EVIDENCE LETTER FROM THE MEMBER’S FORMER COMMANDING OFFICER. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00290-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were not physically qualified for release from active duty on 2 October 2008, or that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 27 May 2009, when you were discharged by reason of physical fitness assessment failure, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in...