Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01171-01
Original file (01171-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD

S

2 NAVY ANNE

X

WASHINGTON DC 20370-510

0

JRE
Docket No: 1171-01
3 December 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.

The Board concluded that the Physical Evaluation Board conducted a fair, impartial and
complete review of pertinent records prior to determining that you were fit for duty. The
Board rejected your contention to the effect that you were reassigned from your normal
duties because of the effects of your various medical complaints. In this regard, it noted that
you were transferred from a position with predominately administrative duties, to one which
was more physically demanding. You performed well in the new assignment, as reflected in
your report of fitness for the 16 September 1998-31 January 1999 period. That report
indicates, among other things, that you had been personally selected as the only housing
inspector for more than 300 housing units; that you served in the capacity of a senior chief
petty officer, and that you greatly exceeded standards in the trait of military bearing, which
includes physical fitness component. There is no indication in that report, or in the previous
three reports, that any of your longstanding physical conditions hindered you in the
performance of your duties. The naked assertion of your former commanding officer that
you had been reassigned out of your specialty because of your medical conditions was not
persuasive evidence of your alleged unfitness for duty. The fact that the Department of

Veterans Affairs (VA) has granted you a substantial disability rating is not probative of error
or injustice in your naval record, because the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to
the issue of fitness for military duty. 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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02046-01

    Original file (02046-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2001 | 02336-00

    Original file (02336-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2001 | 05506-00

    Original file (05506-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the VA rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected", without regard to the issue of fitness for military service, and ratings may be raised or lowered throughout a veteran’s life time as the degree of severity of the rated conditions changes. The VA awarded you a 50% rating, while classifying your condition as "mild". 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 | 01420-01

    Original file (01420-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 November 2001. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 25 October 1988. separation physical examination on 3 June 1992. 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 | 00430-01

    Original file (00430-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 November 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 | CY2005 | 10188-05

    Original file (10188-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2007. 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 | CY2009 | 04090-09

    Original file (04090-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2010. In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigned ratings to the lumbosacral strain and radiculopathy without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform military duty prior to your discharge, and that the rating you received for a mood disorder was based on your condition more than eighteen months after you were discharged from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09521-08

    Original file (09521-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2009. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for numerous conditions that were not evaluated or rated by the PEB is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty, and you have not demonstrated that any of those conditions...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03938-08

    Original file (03938-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 October 2008. In order to be eligible for disability separation or retirement from the Navy, a Sailor must be unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01802-08

    Original file (01802-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. 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...