DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No: 1067-01
27 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 16 August 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, applicable statutes, regulations and policies, and the comments of your counsel.
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 was not persuaded that your condition met the criteria for
a rating in excess of 10% at the time of your discharge. Your disability evaluation
proceedings do not demonstrate that there was persistent swelling of your leg which was
increased on standing or walking, easily relieved by recumbency, or moderate discoloration,
pigmentation or cyanosis. In addition, it noted that when you underwent your pre-separation
physical examination, there was only trace edema in your left lower extremity. In addition,
it concluded that even if it were to be assumed, for the sake of argument, that your condition
warranted a 30% rating at that time, and that your name was placed on the Temporary
Disability Retired List, the rating would have been reduced below 30% under criteria which
came into effect during January 1998, and you would have been discharged by reason of
physical disability after undergoing your first periodic examination.
foregoing, your application has been denied.
panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and votes of the members of the
In view of the
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 | 05056-00
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 In addition, the Board considered the comments applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05285-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 August 2001. The available records do not establish that you suffered from post traumatic stress disorder at the time of your release from active duty or for several years thereafter, or that you were unfit for duty when separated from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07938-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2011. 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 | 00800-01
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. Notwithstanding the clinical recommendation for aortic valve in the absence of any contemporary ejection fraction or the disability rating options are still limited to 30% or Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE OF In summary, 3. functional impairment. time the Petitioner's TDRL status was...
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 | CY2005 | 06153-05
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 underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 23 June 2001 and were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08062-99
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive considered,your application on 13 December 2000. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 05070-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. The VA rated that condition at 30% by analogy to an un-repaired fistula, even though the fistual had been repaired. 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 | CY2002 | 06397-02
06397-02 28 February 2003This 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 21 February 2003. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03113-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. noted that unlike the VA, which rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected”, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only to those conditions which render a service member...