Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09184-06
Original file (09184-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



JRE
Docket No. 09184-06
22 October 2007





Dear

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-me mb er panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2007. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regu1ation~ 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, regulatio n 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. In this regard, the Board found that as you Sustained a detached retina many years after your transfer to the retired reserve, there is no basis for granting your request for correction of your record to show that you were retired by reason of physical disability due to the disabling effects of that condition. The issue of the Propriety of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denial of your request for service connection for the detached retina is a matter within the purview of the VA.

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 | CY2008 | 06080-08

    Original file (06080-08.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. As you have not demonstrated that you were discharged in error, and as your present reentry code is the most favorable code authorized for Sailors discharged by reason of physical disability, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 12466-09

    Original file (12466-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS . A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, Sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 2010. 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 | CY1999 | Document scanned on Thu Feb 01 10_59_55 CST 2001

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 September 1999. 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. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR3737 13

    Original file (NR3737 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You requested removal of a nonjudicial punishment (NJP) held on 28 May 2008, retirement in the rank of commander (pay grade 0o- '5), and removal of two fitness reports for 5 October 2006 to 18 April 2007, and for 17 August 2007 to 8 January 2008. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 July 2014. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00057-07

    Original file (00057-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 July 2007. 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 should note, however, that during the period when your name was on the TDRL, military retired pay entitlements were offset dollar for dollar against...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09891-07

    Original file (09891-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 August 2008. Your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty on the date of your discharge from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08531-07

    Original file (08531-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the report of the Headquarters Marine Corps Performance Evaluation Review Board (PERB), dated 14 September 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. Enclosure DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYHEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS3280 RUSSELL ROADQUANTICO, VA 221 34~51O3 IN REPLY...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11371-08

    Original file (11371-08.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, ‘xegulations and policies. The fact that the VA recently increased your disability rating to 30% is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because that rating was assigned because your condition had become more severe. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 04852-06

    Original file (04852-06.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 July 2007. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 25 October 1999. 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 | 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...