DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No. 2953-17 
AUG 1 2 2018 


Dear 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the 
provisions of Title 10 United States Code § 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration 
ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the 
existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been 
denied. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your case on its merits. A three-member 
panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your 
application on 17 May 2018. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished 
upon request. 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, relevant portions of your naval record and applicable 
statutes, regulations and policies. 

A review ofyour record reveals that you entered active duty service in United States Marine 
Corps on 13 April 1988. On 23 December 1989, you were in a motor vehicle accident that left 
you severely injured and three others dead. Specifically, you suffered a closed head injury, left 
optic nerve injury, facial fractures, and a left radius fracture. An incapacitation determination 
was made on 8 January 1990, which determined that you were not mentally competent to make 
personal, financial, or medical decisions for yourself. Your father was assigned as your trustee 
to make these decisions. On 10 May 1990, a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) found you "unfit" 
for duty due to physical disability. The PEB also determined that your disability was "[n]ot 
ratable due to intentional misconduct." The recommended disposition was listed as "[m]edical 
discharge (no disability benefits)." Your trustee did not concur with the PEB' s findings and 
requested a formal hearing on 5 July 1990. On 4 October 1990, after extensive involvement in 
your case, your trustee signed an acknowledgement stating "after consultation with assigned 
military counsel ... I have decided to accept the record review panel findings in the case of my 
son...which recommend that he is unfit by reason of physical disability that is not ratable." On 
29 November 1990, you were separated with an Honorable characterization of service due to . 
"Physical Disability, without severance pay," and assigned a reentry code ofRE-3P. 

You requested that the PEB's finding of unfitness due to a not-ratable physical disability be 
overturned: The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all 
potentially mitigating factors, to include your assertions that you were not given the opportunity 
to testify in your defense and that your father did not understand military jargon. Nevertheless, 
the Board concluded that you were given sufficient due process and that the requested relief is 
not warranted. You were not processed out ofthe service for misconduct, nor were you given an 
unfavorable characterization ofservice, so you were not entitled to an administrative separation 
board. To ensure that you had representation during the time ofyour medical separation, your 
father was designated as your trustee and provided assigned military counsel. After consulting 
with military counsel, your father concurred with the review panel's finding that you were unfit 
by reason ofphysical disability that is not ratable. After exhausting all available avenues; the 
Board was unable to locate a line ofduty investigation which pertains to your case. Based on the 
available information contained in your service records, the Board did not identify an error or 
injustice warranted relief in your case. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken 
at this time. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of 
new and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered by the Board. 
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all 
official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the 
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director