Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04042-01
Original file (04042-01.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: 4042-01
12 February 2002

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 7 February 2002. 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 record 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 rejected your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you should have
received a 30% disability rating for your lower back condition, vice the 10% rating you
received in 1966. Available records indicate that the condition was productive of minimal to
mild impairment at that time. The Board noted that you had full range of motion in your
lower back, with normal tendon reflexes, and no radiating pain, numbness, paresthesia or
As you may know, ratings assigned by the military
weakness of your lower extremities.
departments are fixed as of the date of separation or permanent retirement. The Board also
noted that the Department of Veterans Affairs found that your condition was productive of
only minimal impairment, as it rated the condition at 0% from 6 April 1966 to 24 March
1987.

In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied. 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 | CY2001 | 05506-00

    Original file (05506-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the VA rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected", without regard to the issue of fitness for military service, and ratings may be raised or lowered throughout a veteran’s life time as the degree of severity of the rated conditions changes. The VA awarded you a 50% rating, while classifying your condition as "mild". 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 | 03612-02

    Original file (03612-02.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. The PEB noted that your performance of duty was not significantly impaired by the sleep apnea or the other conditions diagnosed by the medical board. 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 | 04399-99

    Original file (04399-99.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 March 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. The Board concluded that your lower back condition was productive of minimal to mild disability at the time of your discharge, and that the 10% rating...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 00511-04

    Original file (00511-04.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 29 July 1974. Accordingly, it recommended that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01596-03

    Original file (01596-03.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. The Board found that you were hospitalized on 25 April 1971 for back and left leg pain. 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 | 09081-07

    Original file (09081-07.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 September 2008. The Board concluded that your receipt of VA disability ratings for multiple conditions effective the day following your release from active duty is not probative of the existence of material 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02337-01

    Original file (02337-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 November 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 | 07295-02

    Original file (07295-02.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 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 | 00799-02

    Original file (00799-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A medical board was prepared in January 1998 and PEB's Record Review Panel In June, 1998, the forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for consideration. Lumbar Decompression and Low Back Pain Status Post Fusion (72420) The Record Review Panel found the member unfit for duty under VA Code 5295, rated his condition at 10% disability and separation pay. However, Therefore, after careful consideration of all relevant medical evidence, viewed in a .light most favorable to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01

    Original file (02290-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit 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.