Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01277-07
Original file (01277-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




 JRE
 Docket No. 01277-07
25 March 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 20 March 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 you were released from active duty on 30 April 1962 and transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List the following day. You were permanently retired by reason of physical disability on 1 December 1965. As the DD Form 214 you were issued on 30 April 1962 correctly reflects your release from active duty and transfer to the TDRL, there is no basis for amending it to show that were permanently retired in 1965. In addition, as you did not serve on active duty between 1 May 1962 and 30 November 1965, you were not entitled to a second DD Form
 214. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
If you want to clarify your status for those not familiar with the naval disability retirement system, you should attach a copy of your permanent retirement orders to the DD Form 214 you were issued on 30 April 1962.






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 | 03824-07

    Original file (03824-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 January 2008. The VA denied your request for service connection for thirteen other claimed disabilities, to include posttraumatic stress 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11887-08

    Original file (11887-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 2009. 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. naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00480-08

    Original file (00480-08.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 October 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 | 02187-08

    Original file (02187-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02400-07

    Original file (02400-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    02400-07 3 April 2008This 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 3 April 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00171-09

    Original file (00171-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with ali 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 | CY2003 | 06901-03

    Original file (06901-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. You were permanently retired by reason of physical with a disability rating The Board was not persuaded that you should have been permanently retired on 30 December 1967, TDRL. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02676-08

    Original file (02676-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. In addition, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) that considered your case on 18 August 2005 found you fit for duty. 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 | 01304-08

    Original file (01304-08.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. The VA denied your request for service connection for nine other conditions. 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...