DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
Docket No:
20 December 2000
806299
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
considered,your application on 13 December 2000. Your allegations of error and
session,
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.
Fioard noted that the Physical Evaluation Board
(PEB) determined that you were unfit
The
for duty by reason of physical disability because of a knee condition, which it rated at 0%.
You accepted those findings on 3 March 1999, and you were discharged with entitlement to
disability severance pay.
knee condition at 30% was
The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated your
not considered probative of material error or injustice in your case. In this regard, the Board
noted that the Navy and VA are separate agencies, and that neither is bound by the rating
determinations of the other.
In addition, it noted that the VA rating was based on the results
of a physical examination which was conducted approximately four months after you were
discharged from the Marine Corps. The Board was not persuaded that you met the criteria
for a 30% rating as of the date of your discharge. 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. As noted above, you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and you accepted that finding, which suggests that you felt that you were fit for duty at that time. 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 | CY2007 | 05467-07
05467-07 1 July 2008 A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your Support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, Corps from 10 July 2000 to 31 December 2001, when you were discharged by reason of physical disability, with disability rating of 10% for a Condition of your left ankle. Effective 1 January 2002, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rated the ankle condition at 10%, and added a 0% rating for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 10767-08
oe A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2009. You did not complete any Reserve drilis or active duty service after that date. 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 | CY2007 | 02440-07
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 underwent a pre-commissioning physical examination on 12 December 2000, at...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07613-01
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 26 August 2002, a copy of which is attached, and the comments of your counsel. 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. This letter responds to reference (a) which requested comments and a recommendation regarding Petitioner's request...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07762-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 March 2011. You accepted those findings on 10 January 1989, and were honorably discharged from the Marine Corps on 17 February 1989 Following your discharge, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a 10% rating for the flat feet condition, and denied your request for service connection fora bilateral knee condition. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06233-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00009-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2008. The Board concluded that the rating actions taken by the VA in your case in 2002 and 2004 are not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record. 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 | 05913-00
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. The military departments may assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service fixed as of the date of separation or permanent member has been found unfit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability, and ratings are retirement. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04018-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA effective the day after you were discharged from the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...