Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00032-08
Original file (00032-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX JRE
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 00032-08

21 November 2008

 

 

This igs 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 November 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
1 August 1991 to 21 August 1996, when you were transferred to
the Temporary Disability Retired List because of a seizure
disorder. On 22 April 2003, the Department of Veterans Affairs
awarded you a disability rating of 20% for the seizure disorder.
On 15 November 2004, you case was administratively closed by the
Navy Personnel Command because of your failure to undergo a
final periodic examination. You name was removed from the TDRL
on 7 April 2007.

The Board carefully considered your unsubstantiated contention
to the effect that you did not “receive anything stating I had
to report” and that “if I had known I would have reported”, but
found it insufficient to warrant restoring your name to the
TDRL. The Board noted that you would not be entitled to retired
pay even if your name were to be restored to the TDRL, as your
statutory entitlement to that pay ended on the fifth anniversary
of your transfer to the TDRL.

In view of the foregoing, 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08664-09

    Original file (08664-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ”A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 June 2010. On 1 October 1996 the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reviewed that report of that examination and determined that you remained unfit | for duty due to a seizure disorder, which was ratable at 20%. 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 | 07956-08

    Original file (07956-08.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. In this regard, the Board concluded that you were properly discharged with a disability rating on 20% for a seizure disorder. 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 | CY2001 | 07406-01

    Original file (07406-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 December 2001. demonstrates that your discharge by reason of misconduct was erroneous or unjust, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. 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 | 03527-08

    Original file (03527-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 July 2009. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your disability was ratable at or above 30% disabling as of 12 May 2006, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00072-01

    Original file (00072-01.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 February 2001. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1156 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR1156 14_Redacted.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 2015. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of service, desire to be restored to paygrade E-5, and assertion that your diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) contributed to your misconduct while on active duty. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1156 14

    Original file (NR1156 14.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 2015. 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 | PD2010-00712

    Original file (PD2010-00712.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The medical record documents three major seizures in the first year of diagnosis, in November 2002, March 2003, and July 2003. VA treatment report on 20 November 2008, also stated last the major seizure was March 2008. The FPEB noted that the CI had another seizure in March 2008.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 00480-06

    Original file (00480-06.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. The Board found that you served on active duty in the Navy from 13 August 1986 to 14 October 1987, when you were discharged by reason of physical disability due to a conversion disorder that was rated 10% disabling. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089956C070403

    Original file (2003089956C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his 30 April 1983 separation for permanent physical disability (10%) with entitlement to severance pay be changed to retirement at a rate of 40% disability. The PEB recommended that he be placed on the TDRL with a disability rating of 80%. The findings and recommendations of the PEB were approved and on 30 April 1983, the applicant was separated by reason of physical disability at a rate of 10%.