Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11350-07
Original file (11350-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

JRE
Docket No. 11350-07
26 September 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 25 September 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 on 27 January 1986, the Physical Evaluation
Board (PEB) found you unfit for duty due to flexion contracture
of two fingers of your left (non-dominant)hand, which it rated
at 10% disabling. You requested reconsideration of that
finding, and on 26 February 1986, the PEB found you fit for
duty. As you continued to complain of pain in your left hand,
your case was once again forwarded to the PEB in November 1986.
The PEB found you unfit for duty, and assigned a disability
rating of 10%. You were discharged by reason of physical
disability, with entitlement to severance pay, on 29 December
1986, in accordance with the approved findings of the PEB.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your
condition was ratable at or above 30% disabling on 29 December
1986, which was the minimum rating necessary for you to qualify
for disability retirement, there is no basis for recommending

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.

The Board suggest that you consider submitting an application to
the Department of Veterans Affairs for disability compensation
for your hand condition.

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,

\s

W. DEAN BF
Executive Di

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00606-07

    Original file (00606-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03530-01

    Original file (03530-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. approved and you were transferred to the PDRL with a 50 percent disability rating on 16 September 1969. 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 | 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04422-10

    Original file (04422-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2011. You were discharged in accordance with the approved findings of the PEB on 31 March 2007. 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09901-08

    Original file (09901-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 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...

  • 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 | 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 | 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 00105-97

    Original file (00105-97.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NCPB LEGAL OPINION SUBJ: BCNR ISSUES ICO 8 Dee 98 Address Petitioner's contentions concerning his entitlement 1. to disability rating for his conditions and particularly his contention that the PEB is required to rate all conditions which contribute to an unfitting condition. CODE UNFIT FOR DUTY WITH A 302 7319, V.A. CODE TOTAL RATING TXE TEMPoRAB~ 0~ DLBABrLITY so#, A ND CAbE RETIREMENT AVAILABLE TO THE PANEL WERE THE F,ILB, EVZDENCE HEALTH: RECOR,D> HEALTH RECORD ENTRIES AND A LETTER...