Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00264-07
Original file (00264-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
' WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JRE
Docket No. 00264-07

4 February 2008

 

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 31 January 2008. 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. In this connection, the Board concurred
with the findings made in your case on 20 October 2006 by the |
Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Branch, Secretary of
the Navy Council of Review Boards, that your impaired hearing is
not combat related. The Board did not consider your Agent
Orange-related disabilities because there is no evidence in the
available records that those conditions have been rated by the
Department of Veterans Affairs, or that CRSC Branch has denied
your request for CRSC for such conditions. 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06206-07

    Original file (06206-07.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. In addition, the Board considered the decision of the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Branch , Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards (CORE), dated 29 December 2006, that your condition is not related to exposure to Agent Orange, or otherwise combat-related.After careful...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02264-06

    Original file (02264-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2007. Your case for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) is not supported by the relevant documentary information provided.2. Reconsideration by the CRSC Branch is appropriate under any of the following circumstances:(1) You believe this decision is incorrect due to an administrative error or incorrect/incomplete information.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05121-07

    Original file (05121-07.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. In addition, the Board considered the findings of the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Branch, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 14 May 2004.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00314-07

    Original file (00314-07.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. The Board concluded that the entry in your evaluation report for the 17 January-5 November 1968 period concerning “trouble” with your back” refers to recurrent infections of a pilonidal cyst which required extensive treatment, rather than to a traumatic back injury. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 02675-05

    Original file (02675-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sincerely, Enclosure DEPARTI~NT OF THE NAVY SECRETARY OF THE NAVY COUNCIL OF REVIEW BOARDS COMBAT-RELATED SPECIAL COMPENSATION BRANCH 201 12TH STREET SUITE 703 ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4357 iN REPLY REFER 10 1850/I CRSC 15 Mar 2005 Subj: APPROVAL OF CRSC UPON RECONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF~E~ qflUIIgIpUUIqqU~MUJP~4~ USN DOCKET NUMBER NCO4—00680 Ref: (a) 10 U.S. Code 1413a End: (1) DD Form 149 Application for Correction of Military Record 1. Your application package does not establish that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 01928-05

    Original file (01928-05.doc) 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 noted that SMC is considered combat-related only in those cases where all of the conditions upon which the award of SMC is based are also combat-related. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05029-07

    Original file (05029-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your request should be based upon information that was not already contained in your original application package and should includeSubj: DENIAL OF CRSC IN THE CASE DOCKET NUMBER MCO6-02904supporting documentation, as appropriate. Reconsideration by the CRSC Branch is appropriate under any of the following circumstances:(1) You believe this decision is incorrect due to an administrative error or incorrect/incomplete information. to review CRSC decisions.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 02756-06

    Original file (02756-06.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 was not persuaded that your cardiovascular disease was the direct result of a combat...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07924-05

    Original file (07924-05.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 was not persuaded that you injured your lower back, left biceps muscle and left shoulder...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10798-06

    Original file (10798-06.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 following documents are recommended: Original VA Rating Decision discussing why the VA...