DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG
Docket No: 1222-07
8 February 2008
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-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
ok
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 29 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,
Your records show that on 10 September 1976 you were transferred
to the Temporary Disability Retired List. On1 August 1978 you
were permanently retired by reason of physical disability with 18
, 9 months and 25 days of active duty. In accordance with
the law in effect at the time, your service was rounded up to 19
years for the purpose of computing your retired pay. You then
filed a claim with the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and
were granted a service connected disability pension which is
being offset against your retired pay.
The law changed in 2004 to allow concurrent receipt of retirement
and disability pay (CRDP). However, in order to be eligible for
CRDP, you must be retired with 20 years of actual service which
you do not have. Accordingly, you are requesting that your
record be corrected to show that you retired with 20 years of
active service.
The Board is receiving many applications from individuals in your
situation. In a previous split decision of the Board ina
similar case, the dissenting member recommended that the petition
of an individual with over 19 years and 11 months of service be
denied noting that the situation was no different than that of
thousands of others and that Congress apparently deliberately set
the 20 year requirement to prevent individuals in your Situation
from receiving the benefits of CRDP. He believed that a change
in the law was the proper disposition of these cases. The
minority recommendation denying a correction to the record was
approved by a designee of the Assistant secretary of the Navy
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs). This action was taken with the
understanding that it would serve as guidance in future similar
Since you have been treated no differently than many others in
your situation, the Board could not find an error or injustice in
your case. The Board concluded that a correction to your record
was not warranted.
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,
Lie,
W. DEAN PPE
Executive D
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03710-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 January 2008. Accordingly, you are requesting that your record be corrected to show that you retired with 20 years of active service. 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 | 01903-05
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 12 June 1995 while you were serving on active duty in the grade of master sergeant, a physical...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10694-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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. Since you retired with less than 20 years of active service the Defense Finance and Accounting Service is apparently denying you concurrent...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02187-08
There was not noted to be too much response to the ECTs for the first five treatments, however, following that the patient began to improve markedly. In that anniversary year you were credited with 48 of the 50 retirement points needed for a qualifying year of service. Sincerely, Nadu W. DEAN PFEJURF Executive Dil r DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY (MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS) 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON DC 20350-1000 May 5, 2008 This correspondence is in...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04418 ADDENDUM
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSDC recommends denial of the applicants request for an increase in her deceased husbands CRSC rating to 100 percent, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. As for her request related to his cysts, we also do not find the evidence she has presented sufficient to conclude that his CRSC rating should be increased based on this condition. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02152-09
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 TRG Docket No: 2152-09 31 March 2009 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records Secretary of the Navy a Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 Encl: (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a retired member of the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting, in effect, that his record be...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03936
His narrative reason for separation was Disability, Temporary. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSD recommends denial. The applicant does not contest in his application that he had any additional active military...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 07482-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 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. During the period from 15 June 2001 to 15 June 2002 you received a series of adverse performance evaluations from different raters and reporting seniors.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03698
In view of the fact that her career was cut short due to malpractice, she should be credited with the 20 years of active service that she planned to perform and entitled to full concurrent receipt of her military disability retired pay and disability compensation from the DVA. The applicant contends she should be awarded a longevity retirement (as if she had served 20 years) since it was her intent to complete the required service for retirement from active duty. While she may have...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03593
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial indicating there was no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred during the disability process. The applicant does not have the required 20 years of active service time to apply for CRDP. ...