DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 09174-07
18 August 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 14 August 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 honorably discharged from the Navy
on 27 July 2004 at the expiration of your enlistment, as
extended. Although you suffered from many diseases, injuries
and medical conditions during your service, each was carefully
evaluated prior to your discharge, and none was considered
disqualifying for further service or separation.
The Board concluded that you have not shown that you suffered
from any condition or conditions that warranted consideration by
a physical evaluation board prior to your separation. It was
apparent to the Board that you wanted to remain on active duty,
and would have been capable of performing your duties had you
been permitted to reenlist. You attained an individual trait
average of 3.57 during the rating period ending on 15 November
2005, and were rated above 10, with 10 and below 10 other
Sailors. Your trait average dropped to 2.71 in the report
period ending on 24 July 2006, but you received satisfactory
ratings in the areas of personal job accomplishment/initiative,
quality of work, equal opportunity, teamwork, leadership and
professional knowledge. Your reporting senior described you as
a competent technician.
Your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is not probative of the
existence of error or injustice in your naval record. In this
regard, the Board noted that the VA assigns disability ratings
without regard to the issue of fitness for military service. [In
addition, it appeared to the Board that the majority of the
ratings you were assigned by the VA were based on your
unverified, subjective complaints of symptoms, rather than
objective evidence of impairment.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were
unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office, grade,
rank or rating by reason of physical disability at the time of
your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend 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.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04587-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 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 | 04269-07
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.You enlisted in the Navy on 10 October 1979 at age 19. Your conduct marks average was 2.7. ...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02847-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 December 2008. Given your disciplinary actions, failure to attain the minimum behavior mark average required to form the basis for a fully honorable characterization of service, and since you have been treated no differently than others in your situation, the Board found that your service warranted a general characterization of service. Nevertheless, the Board...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01405-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2011. Although you suffered from significant congenital cardiac conditions, it does not appear that you were unfit for duty at the expiration of your enlistment. 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 | CY2002 | 02290-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2002. Unlike the VA, the military departments are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where the service member has been found unfit 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 | CY2007 | 06210-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 February 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 | 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02125-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. leadership and supervisory During your second tour you On 21 January 1971 you received a The record shows that on 16 February 1971 You were You were Character of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00734-08
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04551-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. 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...