Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 09656-04
Original file (09656-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100

 JRE
 Docket No. 9656-04
3 March 2006





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 24 February 2006. 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 noted that you did not submit any evidence in support of your application. In addition, there is no indication in the available records that your pulmonary condition warranted a rating of 30% or higher when you were discharged by reason of physical disability on 16 May 1990. The Board concluded that the alleged circumstances of your reassignment to Diego Garcia have no bearing on the issue of the propriety of the disability rating your were assigned by the Physical Evaluation Board.
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 PFEIFFER
Executive Di rector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04772-10

    Original file (04772-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 April 2011. The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the effect that you should have received a disability rating of 30% or higher for syncope, or that you were otherwise entitled to retirement by reason of physical disability, vice separation with entitlement to severance pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03527-08

    Original file (03527-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2009 | 06638-09

    Original file (06638-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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 | 06790-07

    Original file (06790-07.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 enlisted in the Navy on 1 October 2002. The VA awarded the 10% rating...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08032-07

    Original file (08032-07.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 enlisted in the Navy on 4 October 2000. The VA denied your request for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02771-09

    Original file (02771-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2010. 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. 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 | 10646-07

    Original file (10646-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 October 2008. The VA denied your request for service connection for nine other conditions, to include the personality disorder, which the VA classifies as a developmental disorder rather than a disability. 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 | CY2009 | 03762-09

    Original file (03762-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. The medical board recommended that your case be considered by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). 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 | 01802-08

    Original file (01802-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 October 2008. 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 | CY2010 | 07459-10

    Original file (07459-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. 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...