DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVYANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 03328-03
8 September 2003
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 5 September 2003.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
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 consisted
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.
You were assigned a reenlistment code of
when you were transferred to the
RE-Rl,
The Board found that you served on active duty in the Navy from
29 June 1998 to 23 August 2002,
Naval Reserve.
to indicate that you were eligible and recommended for
reenlistment.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a combined
disability rating of 40% for lumbar strain, status/post head
injury with headaches, and residuals of a left ankle injury.
Following your release from active duty, the
The Board concluded that your receipt of a VA disability rating
does not demonstrate that your release from active duty in the
Navy was erroneous.
no,t&d that the
In this regard, the Board
The VA determination is made without
Navy may assign disability ratings only in those cases where the
service member has been found unfit to perform the duties of his
office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability,
whereas the VA must rate all conditions it classifies as
"service connected".
As you were
regard to the issue of fitness for military duty.
found fit for duty immediately prior to your release from active
duty in the Navy, and as you have not persuaded the Board that
you were, in fact, unfit for duty, it was unable to recommend
any corrective action in your case.
application has been denied.
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.
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
it is important to keep in mind that
the Board.
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record,
existence of probable material error or injustice.
the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
In this regard,
Accordingly, your
The names and votes of the members
You are entitled to have
Sincerely,
Executive Dir
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06064-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2003. The fact that the VA has given you a disability for the residuals of your knee injury is not probative of error or injustice in your military record, because the VA awards disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05954-03
Osgood- In this regard, The Board noted that your receipt of a disability benefits from the VA does not demonstrate that your discharge from the Marine Corps was erroneous. As you have not demonstrated that any of the conditions rated by the VA, either separately or in combination with others, rendered you unfit for duty at the time of your discharge from the Marine Corps, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01794-04
01794-04 13 August 2004This 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 29 July 2004. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...
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 | CY2006 | 06378-06
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 September 2003, the Physical Evaluation Board determined that you were...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00113-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. The Board found that on 21 November 1994, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of an Ll burst fracture, rated at 30%) and a left acetabular fracture and a coccygeal injury, rated together at 30%) for a combined rating of 50%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04381-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. Your receipt of disability ratings from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was not considered 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 erres ar injustice .
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08695-05
08695-05 6 November 2006This is in reference to your application for correction of your navalrecord 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, consideredyour application on 26 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted insupport thereof, yournaval recordandapplicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09267-09
Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform your military duties at the time of your release from active duty. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty at that time, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09081-07
’ 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...