Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06840-00
Original file (06840-00.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: 6840-00
18 September 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 13 September 2001. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the proceedings of this Board.
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval 

&cord and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

Documentary material considered by the Board

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 on 23 July 1993, the Record Review Panel of the Physical Evaluation
Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of a heart
condition it rated at 10%. Initially, you rejected those findings, and requested a hearing;
however, you waived your right to a hearing on 15 September 1999, and accepted the
findings of the  
October 1993.

PEB.You were discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay on

The Board rejected your unsubstantiated contention that you were misadvised by your
military counsel, and it was not persuaded that your condition met the criteria for a rating
excess of 10%. 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

 

21

 in

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 | 06569-00

    Original file (06569-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Documenlary material considered by the Board After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the exi,stence of probable material error or injustice. It may add ratings throughout a veteran ’s lifetime, and may raise or lower ratings as the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06977-01

    Original file (06977-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” The Board noted that it is the function of an MEB, which is composed entirely of physicians, to report on the state of health of the service member who is the subject of the MEB, and to recommend referral of the member to the PEB in appropriate cases. In reference to the question of why Petitioner's cardiac and pulmonary conditions found not unfitting at the time of his initial PEB adjudication and placement on the TDRL, reference Petitioner's original 14 February 1992 Medical Evaluation...

  • 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 | 04175-00

    Original file (04175-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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 | CY2001 | 00091-01

    Original file (00091-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 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 | CY2007 | 00841-07

    Original file (00841-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested, in effect, that your record be corrected to show that you were discharged by reason of physical disability due to unfitting conditions of your feet.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 January 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05933-00

    Original file (05933-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 July 2001. As you have not demonstrated that In this regard, it noted that the VA assigns disability ratings to Affairs(VA) disability rating you were unfit for duty at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06558-00

    Original file (06558-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 April 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 | CY2001 | 04518-00

    Original file (04518-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 September 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. (a) which requested comments and a recommendation regarding Petitioner's request for correction of his On 4 June 1993, the Petitioner was discharged and placed on records. placed on the TDRL with a disability rating...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02816-01

    Original file (02816-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 December 2001. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...