DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No:
15 January 2002
853640
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 10 January 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 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 was unable to conclude tht your condition met the rating criteria for a rating in
excess of 10%.
condition at 10% effective 3 September 1993, and confirmed that rating as recently as 17
August 2000. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
In addition, it noted that the Department of Veterans Affairs rated the
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 | CY2002 | 00093-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs recently awarded him disability ratings for hearing loss (O%), tinnitus (lo%), and residuals of a head injury (10%) is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in his Navy record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of his fitness for military service in 1963....
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 | 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 | 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...
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 | CY2008 | 03527-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your disability was ratable at or above 30% disabling as of 12 May 2006, 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 | CY2002 | 01979-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 October 2002. The fact that the VA has awarded you substantial disability rating is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigns ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, and it may raise, lower, or assign ratings throughout a veteran ’s life time. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03113-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 September 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. noted that unlike the VA, which rates all conditions it classifies as “service connected”, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only to those conditions which render a service member...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07374-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 April 2002. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03507-02
December 1997, the PEB made preliminary findings that you remained unfit for duty, and that your disability was ratable at 20%. VA code 527 1 provides for a 20% rating for marked limitation of motion of the ankle, and 10% for moderate limitation of motion. 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.