DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAVY
BOARD
FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
JRE
Docket No:
23 May 2002
5787-01
This is in reference to your application for correction of your nava
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section
1552.
1 record pursuan
t to the
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 16 May 2002. 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
gpplication, together with all material
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
&bmitted in support thereof, your naval record 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.
The Board rejected your contention to the effect that you qualified for disability retirement
1987, but were “railroaded” out of the Navy without disability benefits. It noted that you
had a minimally disabling back condition at that time, which was rated at 10%. You
contended at that time that you were fully capable of remaining on active duty and
performing all assigned duties, with the possible exception sea duty. Unfortunately, the
Bureau of Naval Personnel denied your request for retention on active duty in a limited duty
status, even though your request was supported by your command. There is no indication
that you were denied any substantial right during your disability processing, or that your
disability should have been rated at 30% or higher.
denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
Accordingly, your application has been
in
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 | CY2004 | 09126-04
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 on 26 April 2002, the Physical Evaluation Board made preliminary findings that...
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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03219-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 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 on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10935-07
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. As you have not demonstrated that any of those additional conditions rendered you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07874-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. As you have not demonstrated that your hip/groin condition was unfitting on 31 March 2002 and ratable at 20% or higher, and/or that you back condition was ratable at 30% or more at that time, there is no basis for corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08109-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 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 on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 04184-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 November 2002. On 9 June 1997, the PEB found you unfit for duty because of your back pain, which it rated at severance pay. 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 | 03605-02
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 | 06153-05
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.The Board found that you underwent a pre-enlistment physical examination on 23 June 2001 and were...