DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370.510
0
JRE
Docket No: 7961-00
10 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 27 September 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures
applicable to the
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your
naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
proceedings.of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board
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. In this regard, the Board noted that there is no basis for correcting your record to
show that you were permanently retired by reason of physical disability on 1 June 1995, vice
transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) on that date, or for granting
you service credit for the time you spent on the TDRL.
As you were not released from
active duty immediately prior to your permanent retirement
in the year 2000, you are not
entitled to a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, to reflect
that transfer. It is suggested that you attach a copy of your permanent retirement orders to
the DD Form 2 14 you were issued on 3 1 May 1995.
In view of 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
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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08664-09
”A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. On 1 October 1996 the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reviewed that report of that examination and determined that you remained unfit | for duty due to a seizure disorder, which was ratable at 20%. 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 | 04816-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 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 | CY2001 | 00800-01
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. Notwithstanding the clinical recommendation for aortic valve in the absence of any contemporary ejection fraction or the disability rating options are still limited to 30% or Subj: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CASE OF In summary, 3. functional impairment. time the Petitioner's TDRL status was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00792-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 June 2001. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition should have been rated at 70% disabling when your name was removed from the TDRL, 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 existence...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01903-05
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.On 12 June 1995 while you were serving on active duty in the grade of master sergeant, a physical...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02074-00
record (page 9) shows that for the period 11 March 1994 to 31 January 1995, you received an overall 3.6 performance evaluation. for the reenlistment of individuals who are discharged from the TDRL if they are otherwise qualified. 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 | CY2003 | 06901-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were permanently retired by reason of physical with a disability rating The Board was not persuaded that you should have been permanently retired on 30 December 1967, TDRL. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04504-02
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. absence of evidence that the removal of your name from the TDRL and your discharge the Navy were erroneous, 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 existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12280-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was ratable at or above 30% disabling on the date of your discharge from the Navy, 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02335-00
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...