Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00878-07
Original file (00878-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 100


 JRE
 Docket No. 00878-07
4 September 2007

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 30 August 2007. 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 were released from active duty on 28 February 2002 and transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) the following day with a 30% rating for a mental disorder. Thereafter, the Department of Veterans Affairs rated your condition at 50% disabling. The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reevaluated your condition and fitness for duty on 26 August 2003, and made preliminary findings that you remained unfit it for duty, and that your condition was ratable at 10%. As you did not respond to the letter notifying you of those findings your case was finalized, and you were discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay.

The Board did not accept your contentions to the effect that your name was removed from the TDRL prematurely. It noted that upon a determination by the FEB that a service member’s disability is permanent and ratable at less than 30% disabling, the member will be discharged by reason of physical disability rather than retained on the TDRL. As your condition was rated at 10% disabling, you did not have a right to remain on the TDRL. Accordingly, and as you have not demonstrated that your discharge is erroneous or unjust, the Board denied your application. 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 | CY2007 | 08400-07

    Original file (08400-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval ‘Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 July 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 | CY2008 | 03988-08

    Original file (03988-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 2 oO oe

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06753-08

    Original file (06753-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2009. As your condition was rated at 10% disabling as of 10 June 2008, you were not entitled to remain on the TDRL. 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 | CY2009 | 08664-09

    Original file (08664-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ”A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. On 1 October 1996 the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reviewed that report of that examination and determined that you remained unfit | for duty due to a seizure disorder, which was ratable at 20%. 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 | CY2002 | 03507-02

    Original file (03507-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    December 1997, the PEB made preliminary findings that you remained unfit for duty, and that your disability was ratable at 20%. VA code 527 1 provides for a 20% rating for marked limitation of motion of the ankle, and 10% for moderate limitation of motion. 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 | 03527-08

    Original file (03527-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your disability was ratable at or above 30% disabling as of 12 May 2006, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08116-02

    Original file (08116-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 31 October 2002. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12476-10

    Original file (12476-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 May 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 | CY2005 | 05962-05

    Original file (05962-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    05962-05 23 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 inexecutive session, consideredyourapplicationon 19 October 2006. The Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), considered the case on 20 December 2004, and found the member unfit for continued naval service due to a physical disability...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05543-00

    Original file (05543-00.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 findings of the PEB were mailed to you at your last On 8 June In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was ratable at 40% or higher at the time of your discharge, and that you were compliant with medical advice, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective...