DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
IRE
Docket No: 91-01
17 August 2001
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 26 July 2001. 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 served on active duty in the Navy from 19 December 1989 to 18
June 1993, when you were discharged by reason of physical disability, pursuant to the
approved findings of the Physical Evaluation Board, which you accepted. You underwent
elective spinal surgery on 8 August 1993. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
awarded you a 10% rating effective from 19 June 1993. A temporary, convalescent rating of
100% was in effect from 10 August 1993 to 1 June 1994, when the 10% rating was restored.
On 15 November 1994, the post-operative VA rating was increased to 40% retroactive to 19
June 1993. The increase was based, in part, on the results of an examination conducted on
25 October 1994.
The Board noted that ratings assigned by the military departments are fixed as of the date of
the service member’s discharge, and are based on the degree of disability extant at that time.
Ratings may not be increased to account for changes in the disability or related conditions
which occur following discharge. The VA is not subject to such constraints, and may raise
or lower disability ratings throughout a veteran’s life time. As noted above, the VA
retroactively increased your disability rating based in part on the results of an examination
conducted more than one year following your discharge.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your disability should have been rated by
the Navy at or above 30% disabling on 18 June 1993, 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07496-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 May 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. The combined rating was increased to 30% on 18 October 1996, and made effective from 10 August 1994. i The Board noted that in order to be entitled to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01667-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2001. You accepted those findings on 16 June 1992, and you The Board noted that disability ratings assigned by the military departments are fixed as of the date of separation or permanent retirement, whereas ratings assigned by the VA may be adjusted throughout a veteran ’s life time as the severity of the rated condition changes In the absence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02336-00
You were evaluated by a Navy psychiatrist on 11 March 1997, and reported that you felt the Paxil was helping and that you were feeling much better. The increase was based on a report of treatment dated 30 November 1998, and a VA rating examination conducted on 4 May 1999, which indicated your depressive symptoms had increased in severity The Board noted that in order to qualify for disability separation or retirement from the Armed Forces, a service member must be found unfit to perform the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06977-01
” The Board noted that it is the function of an MEB, which is composed entirely of physicians, to report on the state of health of the service member who is the subject of the MEB, and to recommend referral of the member to the PEB in appropriate cases. In reference to the question of why Petitioner's cardiac and pulmonary conditions found not unfitting at the time of his initial PEB adjudication and placement on the TDRL, reference Petitioner's original 14 February 1992 Medical Evaluation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05990-98
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. On 14 February 1994, the Record Review Panel of the Physical Evaluation Board made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of your back condition, which it rated at 20% under VA code 5295, as lumbosacral strain. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00946-00
On 18 September 1972, based on a review of records from January and July 1972, the VA increased your rating to 30%. The Board carefully considered your contention that your condition should have been rated at 30% or higher by the Navy in 1963, but it was not persuaded that the condition was ratable in excess of 10% at the time of your discharge. The fact that the VA has rated your condition in excess of 10% disabling since 14 October 1970 was not considered probative of In this regard, it...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02924-00
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. We have determined the evidence in this case does not (a) which requested comments and He was discharged on The petitioner's case history, contained in reference (a), was 2. thoroughly reviewed in accordance with reference The following comments and recommendations are provided: (b) and is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04175-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 June 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04265-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 June 2001. On 14 November 1988, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) advised you that it had rated your back condition at 20%, and denied service connection for a psychiatric disorder. 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.