Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02646-99
Original file (02646-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JRE
Docket No: 2646-99
21 August 2000

.

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 17 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 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.
It was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty when released from active duty
for training on 20 June 1997.
In this regard it noted that although you had sustained a knee
injury which required surgical correction, and declined recommended follow-up surgery, you
completed a period of rehabilitation, and were found tit for release from active duty when
examined on 3 June 1997. You did not report significant symptoms of the knee condition at
that time, and you assessed your health as “good”. The recurrence of symptoms following
your release from active duty was considered insufficient to demonstrate that your release
was erroneous or unjust. 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 | 02649-99

    Original file (02649-99.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 June 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00762-02

    Original file (00762-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the rationale of the hearing panel of the Physical Evaluation Board which considered your case on 14 March 2002, a copy of which is attached. In this regard, it is 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. It is important to note, contdined in Exhibit for the period March 1999 to March 2000. that this...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00431-00

    Original file (00431-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. JUNE 2000 AT BETHESD THE MEMBER APPEARED AT THE HEARING REQUESTING TO BE FOUND UNFIT FOR DUTY AND RETAINED ON THE TDRL AT HER PREVIOUS RATING OF 60% SUPPokT HER REQUEST THE MEMBER PRESENTED UNDER V.A. AFTER CAREFUL REVIEW OF ALL THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE AND BASED ON UNANIMOUS OPINION, THE FORMAL PEB FINDS THE MEMBER...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 04334-01

    Original file (04334-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board your 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 Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of post traumatic stress disorder and major depression, which existed prior to your enlistment, and were not aggravated by your service. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00880-00

    Original file (00880-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sincerely, W. DEAN PFEIFFER Executive Director -- Enclosure i RATIONALE ON 13 SEPTEMBER 1996, A MEDICAL BOARD WAS CONVENED AT THE NAVAL HOSPITAL, CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA IN THE CASE OF THIS 28 YEAR OLD MEMBER WITH THE FOLLOWING DIAGNOSES: (1) CHRONIC INSTABILITY LEFT SHOULDER, 71881 (2) CHRONIC MECHANICAL LOW BACK PAIN, 7242 (3) CHRONIC DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS LEFT KNEE, 71598 (4) SUBLUXATION SPONTANEOUS MANDIBLE, 8300 -- THE RECORD REVIEW PANEL OF THE PHYSICAL ON 15 JANUARY...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01794-04

    Original file (01794-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    01794-04 13 August 2004This 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 29 July 2004. 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 | CY2001 | 08366-00

    Original file (08366-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    TO SUPPORT HIS REQUEST THE MEMBER PRESENTED TESTIMONY AND COPIES OF HIS V.A. THE RECORD DOCUMENTS THAT THE MEMBER HAD CHRONIC LEFT SHOULDER KNEE, AND FOOT PAIN THAT LIMITED HIS ACTIVITIES DUE TO THE ABOVE DIAGNOSES. THE TDRL EVALUATION INDICATES THAT SINCE PLACEMENT ON THE TDRL THE MEMBER HAS UNDERGONE A LEFT ROTATOR CUFF REPAIR IN OCTOBER 1998 BUT CONTINUES TO HAVE CHRONIC SHOULDER PAIN.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08355-01

    Original file (08355-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this regard, the E3oard noted that the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, whereas the military departments rate only those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty. The Board concluded that had the PEB had found your arthritis to be unfitting as of 1 October 1994, it is unlikely that you would have received a substantial rating for that condition, because substantial deductions would have been taken from the rating for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11594-08

    Original file (11594-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. the 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.