Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08289-07
Original file (08289-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O-5~QQ




 JRE
 Docket No. 08289-07
29 July 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 24 July 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were review e d 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 served on active duty in the Marine Corps from 27 November 2001 to 29 August 2002, when you were discharged by reason of a condition, not a disability, which interfered with your performance of duty. The condition was a dysfunctional anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), right knee, status post partial tear, which existed prior to your enlistment, and patellofemoral syndrome, which developed as a result of the pre-existing ACL condition. On 5 January 2007, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determined that your knee condition was aggravated by your naval service, and assigned you a disability rating of 0%.



Your receipt of a 0% disability rating from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because it was assigned without regard to the issue of your fitness to perform military duty. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability that was incurred in or aggravated by your naval service, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
If you believe you are entitled to an decoration which is not listed in your DD Form 214, you should submit a request for that decoration to the National Personnel Records Center, 9700 Page Avenue St. Louis, MO 63132.
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 | 08289-07

    Original file (08289-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 July 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06515-09

    Original file (06515-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2009. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00662-07

    Original file (00662-07.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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00994

    Original file (PD2011-00994.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW Left Knee Condition . Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00865

    Original file (PD2010-00865.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB forwarded “Status /Post (S/P) Left Knee Reconstruction, Symptomatic, Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on NAVMED 6100/1. No other conditions were rated by the VA at 0% within 12 months of separation. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in reference (b), approve the recommendation of the Physical Disability Board of Review Ms. XXX’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either her...

  • 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00025

    Original file (PD2010-00025.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Orthopedic exam several weeks later noted a 1+ effusion with a 1+ Lachman test (i.e., positive anterior instability). After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board unanimously recommends a separation rating of 10% for the left knee ACL condition coded 5257 and 10% for the medial meniscus condition coded 5259 for a combined rating of 20%. Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS

  • 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 | CY2008 | 01227-08

    Original file (01227-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01745

    Original file (PD-2014-01745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Hyperlipidemia was submitted by the MEB as medically acceptable.The Informal PEBadjudicated “right knee pain” as unfitting at 10%, and “left knee pain” as unfitting at 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). On PE of the knees, the left knee was normal in appearance. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.