DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 03786-10
22 December 2010
fear
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, in which you requested, in effect, that your
discharge from the Navy Reserve be set aside and that you be declared
fit for duty.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2
December 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.
On 17 November 2009, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) found you
not physically qualified (NPQ) for service in the Navy Reserve due
to your history of recurrent syncope (fainting) of unknown etiology.
BR letter advising your options with regard to that finding was
forwarded to you on or about 2 December 2009. As you did not respond
within the time prescribed, your acceptance of the NPQ finding was
presumed. On January 2010, the President, PEB, advised the Chief of
Naval Personnel that you had been found NPQ and requested that you
be discharged or transferred toaretired status if appropriate. You
were discharged in accordance with the finding of the PEB on a date
not shown in the available records.
The Board was not persuaded that the PEB erred when it found you not
physically qualified for further service due to recurrent syncope,
or that it did not give you timely notice of your rights and options
in connection therewith. 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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05898-00
(BUMED) that you It was the Naval In addition, the Board noted that as you did not have a remaining reserve obligation The Board noted that a determination of your fitness for duty and entitlement to disability benefits administered by the Department of the Navy is under the cognizance of Disability Evaluation System (DES), rather than the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery. case if the PEB had evaluated this member, she would have been found fit for continued active duty service. from active...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05542-00
A’three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 March 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. DC 203746023 NAVY YARD REPLY REFER TO 00-1 9 IN 542 0 Ser: 24 Ott 200 0 From: To: Subj: Ref: Director, Executive Director, Naval Council of Personnel...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09598-02
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Bureau of Naval Personnel, a copy of which is enclosed. Therefore we do not support his petition wit1 As indicated in reference (b), Ex-Chief Petty Officer 3. * P * Subj: REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF after his discharge, Ex-Chief Petty requested reinstatement in March, 1965.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00399
The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05132-00
The member had a board of flight surgeons in disability from the VA for a "spinal disc but the member complained of It must be noted The member appealed that The member has been The member testified that all his fitness reports were in the top 1% until he stopped drilling in March 1997. that his cessation of drilling status was secondary to his neck surgery. during which time the member was not on active duty in This is consistent with the member's having been there was no opportunity for...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04772-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you should have received a disability rating of 30% or higher for syncope, or that you were otherwise entitled to retirement by reason of physical disability, vice separation with entitlement to severance pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08590-07
Board requesting, in effect, that her naval record be corrected to show that she was not released from active duty on 30 June 2005. The Director concluded that Petitioner had provided insufficient documentation to warrant recommending that her request be granted “due to indications that petitioner was not unfit for continued Naval service despite having been disqualified from flight status.” The Director stated that should additional records become available that are “indicative of active...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09
You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03472-09
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. The Board concluded that although you experienced an episode of fainting during a Marine Corps Reserve drill period, and that the Department of Veterans Affairs granted you a 0% disability rating for exercise induced hypotension with syncope because of that episode, the Board was not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011789
The applicant's counsel indicated: a. the decision was contrary to the medical evidence, several errors occurred in the processing of the applicant's case, and the board denied the applicant due process; b. the formal PEB relied upon a faulty commanders statement and an Officer Evaluation Report (OER) that primarily rated the applicant during the period prior to the pacemaker implantation and while he was on convalescent leave; c. although the applicants commander recommended that he be...