DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 06095-07
26 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 26 June 2008. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
of your application, together with all material submitted in
Support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
The Board found that you served on active duty in the Navy from
5 April 2001 to 4 April 2006, when you were released from active
duty and transferred to the Navy Reserve. You were assigned a
reentry code of RE-1, to indicate that you were eligible and
recommended for reenlistment. You were described in your final
evaluation report as an above average Sailor with unlimited
potential, who consistently put’ one hundred percent effort into
every assigned task and always produced superior results.
Effective 5 April 2006, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
awarded you a 30% disability rating for “adjustment and bipolar
disorder with anxiety and depression [sic]”, 10% ratings for
bilateral knee conditions and tinnitus, and 0% for migraine
headaches, for a combined rating of 50%.
Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA is probative of
the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, as the
VA assigns disability ratings without regard to the issue of a
service member’s fitness for military duty. The military
departments, however, are permitted to assign disability ratings
only in those cases where a service member is found unfit to
reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or
rating by reason of physical disability, and they may rate only
those conditions that render the service member unfit for duty,
or contribute to an unfitting condition and warrant a separate
rating. As noted above, you were eligible and recommended for
reenlistment at the time of your release from active duty. There
is no indication in the available records that you were unfit to
reasonably perform your assigned duties. The Board did not
accept your unsubstantiated contention that you were not
permitted to reenlist “for medical reasons”. It noted that DOD
Instruction 1332.38, Physical Disability Evaluation, paragraph
E2.1.25 provides, in effect, that an adjustment disorder is not
considered to be a disability under the laws administered by the
Department of Defense.
In view of the foregoing, 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,
lead
W. DEAN PF
Executive Difréc
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01227-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2008. In addition, the VA rated three conditions at 0%, and determined that fifteen other conditions for which you requested ratings were not incurred in or aggravated by your naval service. The military departments, unlike the VA, are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where a service member has been found unfit to reasonably...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06638-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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 | 02228-07
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. On 18 December 2004, you reenlisted in the Navy Reserve. 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07646-10
The Board may deny an application in executive session if it determines that the evidence of record fails to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. If the petitioner’s fitness is considered questionable by the Board or the author(s) of the medical advisory opinion, the Board or its staff will in most cases seek an advisory opinion from the Director, SECNAVCORB, on the issue of the petitioner’s fitness for duty at the time of his separation or release from active...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 05642-05
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of you application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, you 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 served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 6 June 1967 to 29 December...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00734-08
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06513-06
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 in order for a service member to be retired by reason of physical disability,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05330-07
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 served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 23 August 1977 to 19...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09521-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2009. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for numerous conditions that were not evaluated or rated by the PEB is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty, and you have not demonstrated that any of those conditions...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01189-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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. Your receipt of substantial @isability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because...