DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JRE
Docket No: 5837-02
25 February 2003

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 6 February 2003. 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.

The Board found that you were evaluated by the Central Physical Evaluation Board (CPEB) on 10 June 1982. The CPEB determined that you suffered from bilateral spondylolysis with slight spondylolisthesis, which existed prior to your enlistment (EPTE) in the Navy, and was aggravated by your service. It rated the condition at 10%, less a 10% EPTE factor, for a~X final rating of 0%. You accepted those findings on 10 June 1982, and you were discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay on 16 August 1982. Following your discharge, the Veterans Administration independently determined that your condition existed prior to your enlistment.

The Board noted that the finding that your condition was not incurred during your enlistment did not cause you to lose entitlement to any disability benefits administered by the Department of the Navy, because your condition was not rated at 30% or higher, which would have entitled you to be retired by reason of physical disability. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition did not exist prior to your enlistment, 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,

W.	DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director