DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 09371-07
11 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 7 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 discharged from the Marine Corps
by reason of physical disability on 9 August 1985 with a
combined disability rating of 20% for residuals of injuries you
sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Effective 10 August 1985,
the Department of Veterans Affairs assigned a combined rating of
20% for those residuals. The VA increased the combined rating A
to 30% in 2003, and to 80% in 2006.
The recent increase in your VA ratings does not demonstrate that
you were discharged from the Navy in error in 1985. In this
regard, the Board noted that although the VA may raise or lower
a veteran’s disability ratings throughout the veteran’s
lifetime, ratings assigned by the military departments are fixed
as of the date of separation or permanent retirement. As you
have not demonstrated that you were entitled to a disability
rating in excess of 20% in 1985, 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.
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,
leet
W. DEAN PFREINF
Executive D a
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09081-07
’ 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 your receipt of VA disability ratings for multiple conditions effective the day following your release from active duty is not probative of the existence of material error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 11019-06
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 you were discharged from the Navy by reason of physical disability on 6...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06233-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03314-10
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. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty on 5 June 1969, or that your release from active duty on that date was improper, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 05070-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 May 2001. The VA rated that condition at 30% by analogy to an un-repaired fistula, even though the fistual had been repaired. 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 | 02400-07
02400-07 3 April 2008This 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 3 April 2008. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10102-06
The Board found that on 23 October 1985, the Central Physical Evaluation Board (CPEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of the residuals of injuries to the cervical spine that you sustained on 8 December 1984 in a motor vehicle accident, and that the disabilities were not ratable because you were injured as a result of your own misconduct. VA rating official denied your request, based on their determination that your disabilities were residual to the injuries...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12224-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 June 2009. The fact that you were awarded a combined VA disability rating of 30% effective 21 August 2000 is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because that rating was based on an assessment of the severity of your disabilities more than ten years after you were discharged from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00113-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 January 2002. The Board found that on 21 November 1994, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of an Ll burst fracture, rated at 30%) and a left acetabular fracture and a coccygeal injury, rated together at 30%) for a combined rating of 50%. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00606-07
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 were released from active duty on 13 June 1980 and transferred to the...