DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

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

Docket No: 4146-17 

From: Chairman, Board for Correction ofNaval Records 
To: Secretary ofthe Navy 

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO 
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments 
(2) Department of Veterans Affairs medical report 

1. Pursuant to the provisions ofreference (a) Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed 
enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected 
to place him on the regular retired list with 20 years ofcreditable service. 

2. The Board, consisting of            , reviewed Petitioner's 
allegations of error and injustice on 5 October 2016 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined 
that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. 
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofthe enclosures, naval records, and 
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. 

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts ofrecord pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of 
error and injustice, finds as follows: 

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available 
under existing law and regulations within the Department ofthe Navy. 

b. Petitioner entered active duty with the Marine Corps in October 1966. In 1985, Petitioner 
fell and injured his back. He had surgery to address his symptoms but continues to suffer an 
occupational impairment as a result of his back condition. He was eventually referred to a 
medical board that forwarded his case to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). 

c. On 7 February 1986, Petitioner was found unfit for continued naval service due to his back 
condition and was rated at 20%. He accepted the findings ofthe PEB and, despite a 
determination by the Marine Corps that they can utilize him for four months in a limited duty 
status until he reaches retirement eligibility, he requested not to be retained and was separated 
with approximately 19 years and eight months ofactive service. His application states his 
decision to separate immediately was influenced by financial difficulties and a hostile working 
environment. Petitioner was discharged on 30 May 1986 with severance pay. 

d. In September 1988, Petitioner is struck by a motor vehicle and he was deprived of oxygen 
for an extended period of time cause him to lose his cognitive abilities due to brain damage. He 
has since been able to regain some ofhis cognitive abilities but continues to function as a young 
adult. See enclosure (2). His spouse has been appointed as his legal guardian since his accident 
and filed the application on his behalf. 

e. Petitioner asserts that he was offered an opportunity to finish his last four months ofactive 
duty after he requested reinstatement to the Marine Corps shortly after his discharge. However, 
the Marine Corps offer occurred after he suffered his brain injury that prevented him from 
rejoining the Marine Corps. 

MAJORITY CONCLUSION 

Upon review and consideration ofall the evidence of record, the majority concludes that an 
injustice exists in Petitioner's record to warrant constructive credit sufficient to place him on the 
retired list with 20 years ofcreditable service. In their opinion, the Marine Corps offer to 
reinstate Petitioner after his accident creates an iajustice that should be remedied regardless of 
the lack of error due to his decision to accept the PEB findings in 1986. 

MAJORITY RECOMMENDATION 

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that: 

Petitioner served 20 years ofactive service and was placed on the retired list effective the first 
day ofthe next month after reaching 20 years of service. 

A copy of this Report of Proceedings will be filed in Petitioner's naval record. 

MINORITY CONCLUSION 

A minority ofthe Board ( ) concluded that no error or injustice exists based on 

Petitioner's decision to accept the PEB findings in 1986. The fact the Petitioner was unable to be 
reinstated to the Marine Corps due to circumstances outside ofthe Marine Corps control was 
insufficient evidence ofan injustice to warrant a change to Petitioner's record. 

MINORITY RECOMMENDATION 

That Petitioner's request be denied. 

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) ofthe revised Procedures ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval 
Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(c)) it is certified that a quorum was 
present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the egoing is a true and complete 
record ofthe Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.

5. The foregoing action ofthe Board is submitted for your review and action. 

Executive Director