DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
Bares oF Sg
JRE
Docket No. 03314-10
28 May 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 28 May
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 entered on active duty in the Marine Corps on 10 April 1968. ‘You
underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 28 May 1969 and
were found qualified for separation notwithstanding your history of
being wounded in combat. You were released from active duty for the
convenience of the government on 5 June 1969 under an “early out”
program for Vietnam returnees. On 27 October ‘1970, the Veterans
Administration (VA} awarded you a combined disability rating of 20%
for residuals of shell fragment wounds (SFW) and 10% for anxiety
reaction. On 23 July 1971, the combined rating for residuals of the
SFW was increased to 60% effective 6 June 1969, and confirmed the
10% rating for anxiety reaction. The retroactive increase in the
rating for the SFW was based in large part on the results of an
examination conducted more than two years after you were released
from active duty.
The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability
ratings from the VA is insufficient to demonstrate 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
service on the date of your release from active duty. As you have
not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty on 5 June 1969, or that
your release from active duty on that date was improper, 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
error or injustice.
Sincerely,
lO:
W. DEAN
Executive/Divye¢tpr
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011917
However, there is no evidence of record which verifies his injuries were a result of hostile action in Vietnam. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding the Purple Heart for wounds sustained in July 1969 and showing this award on his DD Form 214. ______________________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 05070-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. The VA rated that condition at 30% by analogy to an un-repaired fistula, even though the fistual had been repaired. 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.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00640
CI CONTENTION : The CI states: “I was far more disabled than the military medical examiner thought and I was not examined thoroughly enough. The examiner also noted the CI continued to minimize both his PTSD and alcohol abuse. He rated his pain as an 8.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00248
Neurologic examination performed on December 3, 2004 was normal and he was ambulating without difficulty. However, the Board also noted residuals of frontal lobe injury not merely restricted to mild memory dysfunction that included problems other cognitive functions (decreased verbal processing, attention, and concentration), irritability, anger, and problems with impulse control reflected in neuropsychological testing and the initial VA mental health clinic encounter 9 months after...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09081-07
’ A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2008. The Board concluded that your receipt of VA disability ratings for multiple conditions effective the day following your release from active duty is not probative of the existence of material error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11594-08
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. 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 | 09422-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Coxrection of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were unfit to reasonably perform your duties at the time of your release from active duty, the Board was unable to recommend 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...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00029
While he was being treated for these injuries he reported panic attacks, nightmares, and difficulty sleeping and was referred to mental health for evaluation. No evidence this condition was unfitting at the time of separation from service. The Board also considered the condition of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and unanimously determined that this condition was not unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no disability rating is applied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05486-99
Reenlistme On 31 OCT 64, Review of medical record reveals initial normal physical exam The patient presented with complaints of anxiety on 4. on 15 MAR 62. His active duty behavior (related to what and The tremor, would now be diagnosed as a personality disorder). has been diagnosed as an initially felt to be related to anxiety, Therefore, I essential tremor and th recommend that former character of the discharge to request for change of the "medical" be denied.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05157-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 August 2000. 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. You were wounded in action on 26 December 1968, and awarded the Purple Heart on 5 January 1969.