Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05968-03
Original file (05968-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
                  DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
        
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         2 NAVY ANNEX   
                                             WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                                                                         
         JRE
                                                               Docket No. 05968-03
                                                                                                   13 August 2004


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 August 2004. 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 in addition, it considered the enclosed advisory opinion from the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards, and your response thereto.
        
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. In this regard, it substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion. The Board was not persuaded that you should have received higher ratings for any rated condition, or that you suffered from any other ratable conditions when you were released from active duty in 1996, and permanently retired in 2001. In addition, the Board was unable to conclude that any material errors occurred in your case resulted in your being permanently retired with a disability rating lower than you should have received. It concluded that the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs in rating several conditions not rated by the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record, because the VA awards disability rates all conditions incurred in, aggravated by, or reasonably connected to a period of military service, without regard to the issue of fitness to perform military duty.

In view of the foregoing, 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 PFEIFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01794-04

    Original file (01794-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Mon Sep 25 10_08_50 CDT 2000

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 1999. The officials who rated your condition were required to choose one of the three options under finding (9) in order to establish your basic eligibility for disability benefits administered by the Department of the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00009-08

    Original file (00009-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | 04071-09

    Original file (04071-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    , A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 04603-08

    Original file (04603-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2009. In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that your disability was ratable at 60% at the time of your permanent cetirement, 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11220-10

    Original file (11220-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 August 2011. The fact that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you separate ratings of 10% for asthma from 13 February 1992, headaches from 12 April 1996, and allergic rhinitis from 7 October 1996, as well as 70% for posttraumatic stress disorder from 30 August 2004, is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record because...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00606-07

    Original file (00606-07.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 were released from active duty on 13 June 1980 and transferred to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12440-08

    Original file (12440-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19. The Board concluded that your receipt of disability compensation from the VA for a depressive disorder is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA assigned the disability rating more than thirty years after you were retired, and without regard to your condition as of the date of your retirement. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08355-01

    Original file (08355-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this regard, the E3oard noted that the VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty, whereas the military departments rate only those conditions which render a service member unfit for duty. The Board concluded that had the PEB had found your arthritis to be unfitting as of 1 October 1994, it is unlikely that you would have received a substantial rating for that condition, because substantial deductions would have been taken from the rating for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02228-07

    Original file (02228-07.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. On 18 December 2004, you reenlisted in the Navy Reserve. 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.