Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05800-08
Original file (05800-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DO 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 05800-08

10 June 2009

 

 

Dear @@

 

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 4 June 2009. 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. In this regard, the Board concluded that
you have failed to demonstrate that the back condition for which
you are currently seeking disability benefits from the
Department of Veterans Affairs was caused by a back injury you
Sustained in 1971 while performing duty in the Marine Corps
Reserve. 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,

deed

W. DEAN
Executive Dikector

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04415-09

    Original file (04415-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 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 | CY2009 | 00415-09

    Original file (00415-09.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 44 March to 9 May 1962, when you were discharged because of a disqualifying back condition which existed prior to your enlistment and was not aggravated by your brief period of service. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07152-08

    Original file (07152-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 May 2009. On 21 May 2007, your commanding officer advised you of his intent to recommend that you be discharged for the convenience of the government by. 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 | 07874-08

    Original file (07874-08.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. As you have not demonstrated that your hip/groin condition was unfitting on 31 March 2002 and ratable at 20% or higher, and/or that you back condition was ratable at 30% or more at that time, there is no basis for corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08924-09

    Original file (08924-09.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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant reinstatement in the Navy as a commissioned officer, because of your disciplinary record from the DRB and your lack of accepting responsibility for your actions. Consequently, when applying for a correction of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10904-09

    Original file (10904-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ° A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by the Navy Personnel Command dated 12 November 2009, a copy of which is attached. 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 | 03149-08

    Original file (03149-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 April 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. On 10 December 1986, you were counseled regarding your unacceptable performance, psychiatric diagnosis, advised where assistance was available, and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09849-09

    Original file (09849-09.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 March 2010. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinions furnished by the Navy Personnel’ Command undated and dated 10 December 2009 with enclosures, copies of which are attached. 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 | 09447-09

    Original file (09447-09.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. The fact that the VA granted you a disability rating approximately twenty years after you were discharged from the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record. 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 | 05422-08

    Original file (05422-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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...