Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05697-05
Original file (05697-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JRE
Docket No. 05697-05
22 September 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 14 September 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, requlations 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 discharged from the Navy on 31 January 2005 by reason of physical disability due to a spinal disorder rated at 10% under Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) code 5299-5237. The VA rated the condition at 10% under VA code 5242, effective 1 February 2005. It should be noted that the Department of the Navy and the VA rated your condition based on the slight limitation of spinal motion found to be present, and each determined that you did not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 10%. In addition, the VA awarded you disability ratings for numerous conditions that were not considered unfitting by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

As you have not demonstrated that your spinal disability should have been rated above 10% disabling, or that you suffered from any other conditions that rendered you unfit for duty, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Accordingly, 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 PFIEFFER
Executive Director


Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 12128 11

    Original file (12128 11.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 October 2012. 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 offical naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01495-08

    Original file (01495-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 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 probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04090-09

    Original file (04090-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 February 2010. In this regard, the Board noted that the VA assigned ratings to the lumbosacral strain and radiculopathy without regard to the issue of your fitness to reasonably perform military duty prior to your discharge, and that the rating you received for a mood disorder was based on your condition more than eighteen months after you were discharged from...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04188-00

    Original file (04188-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The disc condition was rated on a presumptive basis, i.e., it was diagnosed and found to be 10% or more disabling within one year of your discharge from the Navy. The Board noted that the military departments rate only those conditions which render a member unfit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating at the time of his separation or retirement, whereas the VA rates any condition it classifies as “service connected”. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06501-10

    Original file (06501-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 2011. Effective 23 March 1994, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you disability ratings of 20% for the spinal disc eondition, 10% fer CTS of each wrist, 50% for a total hysterectomy with removal of ovaries and fallopian tubes, and 0% for two other conditions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06432-01

    Original file (06432-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 April 2002. Notwithstanding those findings, the VA awarded you a 60% rating under VA cod 5293, effective from 17 July 1999, for pronounced intervertebral disc disease, which is the highest permitted rating for that condition. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01691-03

    Original file (01691-03.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 on 9 September 1997, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10

    Original file (04787-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. As there is no indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty on 30 July 2009 due to the effects of any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was tunable to recommend favorable action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • 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...