DEPARTMENT OF THE NAV
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Y
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 203704100
JRE
Docket No:
16 August 2000
255040
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 10 August 2000. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary
inaterial 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 noted that pseudofolliculitis barbae has been classified by the Department of
Defense as a condition not considered to be a disability under laws administered by that
department. As such, it is not a ratable condition. The fact that the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) has awarded you a 0% rating for the pseudofolliculitis barbae is immaterial,
because that agency operates under regulations and directives not applicable to the
Department of the Navy which permit the rating of your skin condition. Accordingly, and as
you did not suffer from any condition(s) which rendered you unfit to perform your military
In view of
duties, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case.
the foregoing, 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
new
taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of
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 | CY2000 | 08262-00
A three—member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 May 2001. The Board concluded that the foregoing factors and contention were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of three NJPs and special court—martial conviction, and the fact that you accepted discharge rather than face trial by court-martial for two prolonged periods of UA totalling nearly a year. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07179-10
Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative ures applicable to the proceedings of this regulations and proced 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07401-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 May 2009. 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 | CY2010 | 08454-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 June 2011. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA 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 duty at the time of your transfer to the Fleet Reserve. Consequently, when applying for a correction of: an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. As there is no indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty on 30 July 2009 due to the effects of any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was tunable to recommend favorable action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09496-09
R three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 January 2010. 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 | CY2007 | 03478-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 May 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, The Board found that on 28 January 2005, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty by reason of bilateral knee conditions, each of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00651-09
The VA st for service connection for three other ugh you had numerous minor conditions that did jidual compensable ratings, VA rating officials he combination of those minimal disabilities ed you with an unspecified “employment arranted a combined overall rating of 10%. Ther as increased to 40% effective 2 December 1998, ive 30 August 2006. compensable disability rating on 9 March 1995 ate the existence of error or injustice in your this regard, the Board noted that the VA ing without...
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00736
MD02-00736 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020424, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Possible medical board. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).Issue 1: The Applicant, through counsel, contends that racial prejudice by his command
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07971-06
This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10of 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 11 January 2007. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application,together withall material submitted in support thereof,your navalrecordand applicable statutes,regulations andpolicies. ...