Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07852-05
Original file (07852-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         
         2 NAVY ANNEX
 WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
         

         JRE
 Docket No. 07852-05
 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, 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 initially enlisted in the Navy on 9 November 1984. On 6 April 1999, you underwent a pre-separation physical examination. You stated that you were in good health at that time, and the physician who examined you determined that you were physically qualified for separation. You were voluntarily discharged on 29 May 1999, and assigned a reentry code of RE-Ri, to indicate that you were qualified and recommended for reenlistment. Following your discharge, you submitted an application for service connection to the Department of Veterans Affairs for service connection and disability compensation for a number of orthopedic conditions. The VA initially grated you a 0% rating for one condition. You appealed that determination, and were granted a combined rating of 40% for multiple conditions.

The Board noted that whereas the VA must rate all of the conditions that were incurred in or aggravated by the veteran’ s period of military service, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only to those conditions that rendered a service member unfit to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating at the time of separation or permanent retirement. Although you received medical treatment for numerous conditions during your military service, none of those conditions rendered you unfit for duty on 29 May 1999. Your contention to the effect that you were found not physically qualified for enlistment in the Naval Reserve on some unspecified date after 29 May 1999 is insufficient to demonstrate that you were unfit for duty at the time of your release from active duty and discharge. You should note that after a break in service, a former service member generally must meet procurement physical standards, which are much more stringent than retention standards. In addition, changes in a former service member’s condition which occur following his discharge may preclude reenlistment.
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 Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02290-01

    Original file (02290-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit for duty. 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 08032-07

    Original file (08032-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 2008. The Board concluded that your receipt of a combined disability rating of 10% from the VA does not demonstrate that your discharge from the Navy by reason of a condition, not a disability, is erroneous or unjust. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade,rank, or rating, there is no basis for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11951-09

    Original file (11951-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.14 January 2010. The Board concluded that your receipt of a VA disability rating for migraine headaches is not probative of the existence of 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 demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 08120-05

    Original file (08120-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s review was limited to your request for disability retirement, as you have not exhausted an available administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board for upgrade of your discharge to honorable.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support...

  • 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02791-07

    Original file (02791-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by Commandant of the Marine Corps dated 11 June 2007, a copy of which is attached.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 demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05913-00

    Original file (05913-00.pdf) 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. The military departments may assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service fixed as of the date of separation or permanent member has been found unfit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability, and ratings are retirement. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | NC9807005

    Original file (NC9807005.pdf) 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. The Board found that on 26 September 1995, the Record Review Panel (RRP) of the Physical Evaluation Board made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of obsessive-compulsive disorder, rated at 10%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05464-06

    Original file (05464-06.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 evaluated by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on 18 January 2006...