Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 04995-07
Original file (04995-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

 

JRE
Docket No. 04995-07
18 January 2008

 

Dear —e ‘ ; :

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. In addition, it considered the
advisory opinion dated 26 April 1990 from the Physical
Evaluation Board, a copy of which is attached.

 

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 connection, the Board substantially
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
The Board was not persuaded that you were entitled to a
disability rating of 30% or higher at the time of your
discharge, which was the minimum rating required for you to
qualify for disability retirement. Accordingly, your application
has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the

panel will be furnished upon request.
With regard to your request for correction of your DD Form 214,
the Board will direct that your final DD Form 214 be corrected
to show that you had 10 years, 11 months and 16 days prior
active service, rather than 8 years, 11 months and 16 days as

shown on your final DD Form 214.

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,

\Su jp

W. DEAN PF
Executive D r

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11251-07

    Original file (11251-07.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 September 2008. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 1 June 1992. 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 | 01495-08

    Original file (01495-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 January 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. 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 | 06051-08

    Original file (06051-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 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. 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 | CY2007 | 00606-07

    Original file (00606-07.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 released from active duty on 13 June 1980 and transferred to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06315-07

    Original file (06315-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A threé-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2008. 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 connection, the Board substantially concurred with the determination made in your case by the Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09601-07

    Original file (09601-07.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 released from active duty on 23 April 1997 and transferred to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00428-08

    Original file (00428-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL. 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 material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00626-08

    Original file (00626-08.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 | 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 | CY2007 | 04052-07

    Original file (04052-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 September 2008. The Board concluded that you reenlisted in the USMCR on 17 January 2003, rather than the USMC, and that you did not have the right to be retained on active duty beyond 16 October 2003. 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...