DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1091 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 
Docket No. 7383-15 
HAY 2 0 2016 


This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval 
record pursuant to the pr ovisions of 10 USC 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board 
found i t in the interest of justice to waive t he statute of 
limi tations and consider your case on its merits. A three-member 
panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, ·si tting in 
execut ive session, considered your application on 15 April 2016. Your 
al legations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regu lations 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. 

A review of your record shows that you entered active duty with the Marine Corps in January 1966 . A medical entry from January 1966 shows · . that you reported to medical for a right knee problem and were referred to orthopedics for treatment. No other medical entries regarding your knee are in your record. In .April 1968, you were discharged from active duty wi th an RE-1 reenlistment code. 

The Board carefully considered your arguments that you deserve a 
disability discharge along wi th compensation for pain and suffering 
experienced due to your knee condition. You contend your knee 
condition has significantly worsened since your discharge in 1968 and 
required surgery and.c"onstant treatment. Unfortunately, the Board 
di sagreed with your rationale for relief . There was no evidence in 
your record to support a finding that you were unfit for continued 
naval service as a result of a knee related disability. In making 
their decision, the Board r e l ied upon the fact no medical entries 
regarding your knee condition exists i n your record after your first 
month of service indicating that you were not suffering f rom knee pain 
sufficient enough to cause an occupational impairment. In addition, 
the fact you were eligible to reenlist at the end of your obligated 
active service also indicated that you were physically fit for duty in when you were discharged. The fact your knee continued to deteriorate over the past 48 years did not convince the Board that you were unfit due to your knee condition since it is not unusual for physical condi tions to deteriorate over time. Accordingly, the Board was unable to find an error or injustice warranting a correcti on to your record and denied your application. The names and votes of the member s of the panel will be furnished upon request. 

t is· regretted t hat 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 evidence within one year from the date of the Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision.in this case. 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 I probabl e material error or injustice. I 

Sincerely, 

Executive Director