Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04855-07
Original file (04855-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100




JRE
Docket No. 04855-07
3 June 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 30 May 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 regard, the Board concurred with the finding of the Combat Related Special Compensation Branch, Naval Council of Personnel Boards, of 12 March 2004, that your myocardial infarction and related cardiovascular condition are not combat related. The recent determination of the Department of Veterans Affairs that you served on the ground in Vietnam for a short period does not establish that your heart condition was caused by a combat-related event. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. If you wish to apply for combat-related special compensation for prostate cancer and residual conditions, you must submit a new application to the Combat Related Special Compensation Board, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards.


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 | CY2008 | 04987-08

    Original file (04987-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 December 2008. 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. After careful review of the submitted documents, I have determined that the available evidence is sufficient to warrant recommending a partial grant of petitioner’s...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08933-07

    Original file (08933-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 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 | CY2007 | 02296-07

    Original file (02296-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 00264-07

    Original file (00264-07.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 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. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03149-07

    Original file (03149-07.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. [In this connection, the Board concurred with the findings made in your case on 16 October 2006 by the Combat Related Special Compensation Branch, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards, that your disability is not combat related. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04643-07

    Original file (04643-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 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 | CY2007 | 07394-07

    Original file (07394-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTJON OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100JREDocket No. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10106-07

    Original file (10106-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    10106-07 2 June 2008DearThis 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 22 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06628-06

    Original file (06628-06.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. In addition, the Board found that there is no presumptive connection between any of those...