Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02816-01
Original file (02816-01.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: 2816-01
26 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 6 December 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.

1

The Board found that on 29 January 1982, the Physical Evaluation Board made preliminary
findings that you were unfit for duty because of three conditions rated at a combined 10%.
It recommended that you be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay. On 7
February 1982, you declined to request retention on active duty until such time as you
completed twenty years of active service and qualified for transfer to the Fleet Reserve. You
accepted the findings of the Physical Evaluation Board, and waived your right to a formal
hearing. You were discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay 11 June 1982, in
accordance with the approved findings of the Physical Evaluation Board.

The Board rejected your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you were not properly
advised of your rights during the course of your disability evaluation processing. In the
absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were entitled to a combined disability rating
of 30% or higher at the time of your discharge, 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



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05882-09

    Original file (05882-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. As you have not demonstrated that any of the additional conditions rated by the VA rendered you unfit to reasonably perform your Military duties, and that you were entitled to a combined rating from the Department of the Navy of 30% or higher, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02335-00

    Original file (02335-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 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 | CY2002 | 06397-02

    Original file (06397-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | 00606-07

    Original file (00606-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 13 June 1980 and transferred to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06588-00

    Original file (06588-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2001 | 03379-00

    Original file (03379-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive Your allegations of error and injustice session, considered your application on 17 May 200 1. regu’.ations and procedures applicable to the were reviewed in accordance with administrative proceedings of this Board. The military departments, however, may rate only those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty, or which warrant a separate rating. condition was ratable at 30% or higher, or...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05837-02

    Original file (05837-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 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 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 | 08089-00

    Original file (08089-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2001. Effective 9 March- 1999, the VA awarded you a 20% rating for your lower back condition, 10% for your varicose veins, and 10% for a condition of your cervical spine. 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 | 06102-00

    Original file (06102-00.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 January 2991. 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 | 07874-10

    Original file (07874-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 May 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...