Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02833-01
Original file (02833-01.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: 2833-01
3 1 October 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 17 October 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 found that as you were retired by reason of physical disability in 1991, you were
excluded from the provisions title 10, U.S. Code, section 1413. That section was later
amended to include service members retired by reason of physical disability, but the
amendment was not made retroactive. The Board concluded that if it were to correct your
record to show that you transferred to the Fleet Reserve in 199 1, rather than the Temporary
Disability Retired List 
(TDRL) merely to increase your monetary benefits, the effect of that
action would be to circumvent the intent of Congress. As you have not demonstrated that
your retirement by reason of physical disability was erroneous or unjust, the Board was
declined 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 | CY2002 | 04187-00

    Original file (04187-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 February 2001. On 24 October 1986, the Physical Evaluation Board that you remained unfit for duty, and that your condition was ratable at 10%. 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 | 06819-01

    Original file (06819-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested numerous amendments to your DD Form 214.. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 September 2002. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00216-01

    Original file (00216-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 2001. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, limited portions of your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board was not persuaded that you suffered from post traumatic stress disorder in 1945 that you were unfit for duty in 1950 because of a disability which was incurred...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12175-10

    Original file (12175-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2011. You were discharged from the Marine Corps with entitlement to disability severance pay on 1 December 2005. 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 | 06185-01

    Original file (06185-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 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 | 03605-02

    Original file (03605-02.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 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance applicable to the proceedings of this Board. In addition, it considered the comments of your counsel with administrative regulations and procedures Your allegations of error and Documentary material considered by the Board After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05807-05

    Original file (05807-05.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 enlisted in the Navy on 28 June 1998. Effective 13 November 1999, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00272-08

    Original file (00272-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2008. 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. 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 | CY2008 | 02676-08

    Original file (02676-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. In addition, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) that considered your case on 18 August 2005 found you fit for duty. 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 | 00101-01

    Original file (00101-01.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. Your allegations of error and 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...