Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10935-07
Original file (10935-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE

Docket No. 10935-07
22 August 2008

 

 

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 21 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 served on active duty in the Navy from
21 March 1994 to 1 November 2002, when you were discharged by
reason of physical disability due to residuals of crush injuries
to your left hand, which were rated at 20% disabling. On 10
December 2002, the Department of Veterans Affairs awarded you
disability ratings of 30% for degenerative changes in the lumbar
spine, 20% for left shoulder impingement syndrome, 20% for the
residuals of the crush injuries to your left hand, and 0%
ratings for three other conditions.

Your receipt of multiple disability ratings from the VA for
conditions not rated by the Department of the Navy is not
probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy
_record, because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to
the issue of your fitness for military duty. As you have not
demonstrated that any of those additional conditions rendered
you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your office,
grade, rank or rating by reason of physical disability, 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

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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09081-07

    Original file (09081-07.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 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01702

    Original file (PD2012 01702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB forwarded crushing left hand injury; status post (s/p) surgical treatment of near amputation of left middle, ring and small fingers; arthrofibrosis of the proximal interphalangeal joint of the left middle, ring and small fingers; and decreased left hand grip strength conditions to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E. Arthrofibrosis Proximal and Distal Interphalangeal Joints Left Middle, Ring and Small FingersCondition . Physical Disability Board of Review

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10295-06

    Original file (10295-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed written application, enclosure (1), with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that he is entitled to combat-related special compensation (CRSC) for residuals of a left foot injury which has been rated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) at 30% under VA code 5284. The VA awarded him service connection and a 10% rating for status post...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024501

    Original file (20100024501.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He underwent an MEB which recommended that he be considered by a PEB. For example, it is noted that the VA awarded him a disability rating (albeit zero) for a finger injury. The applicant was properly rated at 20 percent for his right dominant brachial plexus neurapraxia.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00113-02

    Original file (00113-02.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 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 | CY2009 | 06432-09

    Original file (06432-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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. 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 | CY2009 | PD2009-00016

    Original file (PD2009-00016.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), determined unfit for continued military service and separated at 20% disability using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Naval and Department of Defense regulations. Unfitting ConditionsCodeRatingDateConditionCodeRatingExamEffective Left Humerus Supracondylar Fracture5299-520220%20030326Left (Non-Dominant) Grade 2 Open Distal Humerus Fracture, Status Post Open Reduction and Internal...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 03762-09

    Original file (03762-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. The medical board recommended that your case be considered by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). 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.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00677

    Original file (PD2012-00677.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6040.44, however, resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation and is limited to conditions adjudicated by the PEB as either unfitting or not unfitting. At the VA Compensation and Pension exam performed a month prior to separation, the CI reported decreased sensation, continued weakness, and poor range‐of‐motion of the left thumb and hand. The VA rated the left thumb...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03328-03

    Original file (03328-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. found fit for duty immediately prior to your release from active duty in the Navy, and as you have not persuaded the Board that you were, in fact, unfit for duty, it was unable to recommend any corrective action in your...