Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00317-07
Original file (00317-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

JRE
Docket No. 00317-07

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 10 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.

The Board found that on 20 September 2006, the Physical
Evaluation Board (PEB) made a preliminary finding that you were
fit for duty notwithstanding your cervicalgia, lumbago and
spondylolisthesis. In making that finding, the PEB considered
the report of a medical board dated 23 June 2006 and a non-
medical assessment (NMA)letter from your command dated 28 June
2006. The NMA indicates that you were working in your military
specialty and had passed the most recent physical readiness
test. Your commanding officer described you as a definite asset
to your unit, and stated that you had earned the respect of your
peers and superiors. He highly recommended that you be retained
in the naval service. You accepted the findings of the PEB on 5
October 2006, and your disability evaluation was terminated n 11

October 20006.

The Board was not persuaded that the PEB erred when it found you
fit for duty. Although you suffered from significant spinal
pathology and back and neck pain, you continued to perform your
duties in an outstanding manner. The fact that you lost
entitlement to Navy Reserve disability benefits upon the
termination of your disability proceedings, as required by law
and regulation, and your contention that you are unable to work,
were carefully considered but considered insufficient to warrant
a change in the fitness determination.

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,

lo eed

W. DEAN PFEL
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01971-07

    Original file (01971-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 May 2006, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made the preliminary finding that you were fit for duty. Prior to making that finding, the PEB considered the medical board report, pertinent medical records, and a non- medical assessment which indicates, in part, that your back pain did not require you to work out of your specialty as a hospital corpsman, and that you had good potential for continued service despite the fact that you were not worldwide assignable and could not complete...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00317

    Original file (PD2010-00317.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The severity of the CI’s symptoms at the time of the MEB psychiatric NARSUM three months prior to separation was documented as moderate by the examiner. He denied suicidal ideation, but had thoughts of hurting others. Pre-separation documentation records satisfactory performance of duties, and VA evidence 11 to 15 months post-separation reflects status as a full-time student (the later C&P examination in December 2008 documented CI report of difficulties with school due to his symptoms).

  • 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 | 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 | 09521-08

    Original file (09521-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2009. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for numerous conditions that were not evaluated or rated by the PEB 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 for military duty, and you have not demonstrated that any of those conditions...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04043-07

    Original file (04043-07.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.On 6 November 2006, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were fit...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03233-07

    Original file (03233-07.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 were evaluated by a medical board on 9 March 1988 and given a diagnosis of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00630-07

    Original file (00630-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 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 | CY2005 | 06105-05

    Original file (06105-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 August 2004, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) considered the medical board report and other records, and determined that you were fit for duty. You were discharged from the Navy under honorable conditions on 29 October 2004, by reason of a personality disorder. 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,

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 04829-05

    Original file (04829-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    04829-05 10 October 2006This 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 21 September 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable...