DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 792-01
27 July 2001
Dear
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 14 June 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. In this regard, the Board noted that you were released from active duty on 9
November 1992, and transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List
(TDRL) the
following day with a disability rating of 70%. You condition was reevaluated 1997, and the
disability rating was decreased to 30%. You were permanently retired with the 30% rating
effective 10 November 1997. As your physical evaluation board proceedings cannot be
located, the basis for the reduction in the rating is unknown; however, there is a presumption
of regularity which attaches to official records. In the absence of evidence which
demonstrates that your condition should have been rated at 70% disabling when your name
was removed from the TDRL, 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 | 04816-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 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 | 05545-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 August 2001. As the Board was not persuaded that the disability rating you were assigned by the Secretary of the Navy is erroneous or unjust, it was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
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 | CY2002 | 06427-98
Subj : I N THE CASE d. The following correction of her record is recommended to accurately account for the Petitioner ’s condition: CATEGORY I: Unfitting conditions: 1. DC 20374-5023 542 0 Ser: 00-1 6 26 Sep 200 0 From: To: Subj: Ref: Director, Executive Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards Board for Correction of Naval Records (a) Chairman, (b) SECNAVINST BCNR JRE:jdh DN: 6427-98 ltr of 14 Jun 2000 1850.4D SE OF This responds to reference (a) which requested comments and...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00745-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. The Board found that your final disability rating was based on an assessment of the level of impairment caused by your disabilities, rather than on the number of years of creditable service you completed. 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 | CY2002 | 08848-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 February 2003. a 30% disability rating for labyrinthitis. 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 | CY2008 | 12280-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was ratable at or above 30% disabling on the date of your discharge from the Navy, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09601-07
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 were released from active duty on 23 April 1997 and transferred to the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06588-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive Your allegations of error and session, considered your application on 30 August 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Your condition had improved substantially while (TDRL) in In view of the foregoing, your request for correction of your record to show that you were permanently retired by reason of physical...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08863-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 December 2002. There is no basis for correcting the form you were issued on 16 December 1994 to show that you were permanently retired on that date, rather than transferred to the TDRL. 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.