DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 430-01
14 November 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 1 November 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.
patellofemoral syndrome, pes
The Board found that you were evaluated by a physical evaluation board
December 1996, and notwithstanding your history of gout, hypertension, hyperlipidemia,
obesity,
planus, hallux valgus, and mechanical low back pain,
found fit for duty. You accepted that finding on 30 January 1997. You remained on active
duty until 16 April 1997, when you were separated pursuant to the Navy’s high-year tenure
policy, as an E-4 with more than 10 years of service. Following your discharge, the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a combined disability rating of
effective from 17 April 1997,for gouty arthritis, hypertension, and a left ankle injury.
(PEB) on 23
30%)
The Board concluded that your receipt of a substantial disability rating from the VA is not
probative of the existence material error or injustice in your case. In this regard, it noted
that the VA awards disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty.
As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty when discharged from the Navy,
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 | CY2002 | 00860-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 200 1. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03604-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05882-09
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. As you have not demonstrated that any of the additional conditions rated by the VA rendered you unfit to reasonably perform your Military duties, and that you were entitled to a combined rating from the Department of the Navy of 30% or higher, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07914-08
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. As you have not demonstrated that any of the conditions rated by the VA, other than patellofemoral syndrome, rendered you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02046-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. The Board did not consider your request for further consideration of your previous request for correction of your record to show that you were retired under the Temporary Early Retirement Authority, or that you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06453-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. The fact that the VA has awarded you substantial disability ratings is not probative of the existence of error in your Navy record, because the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03612-02
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The PEB noted that your performance of duty was not significantly impaired by the sleep apnea or the other conditions diagnosed by the medical board. 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 | CY1998 | NC9807005
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 Board found that on 26 September 1995, the Record Review Panel (RRP) of the Physical Evaluation Board made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of obsessive-compulsive disorder, rated at 10%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02130-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval . 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 material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05190-98
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 April 1999. 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 material error or injustice.