Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07298-08
Original file (07298-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX _
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 07298-08

27 March 2009

 

 

 

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 8 January 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.

The Board found that on 3 June 2008, the Physical Evaluation
Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were fit for
duty, notwithstanding your diagnoses of chondromalacia patella,
history of deep vein thrombosis and several other conditions.
Essentially, the PEB determined that you did not suffer from any
conditions that significantly interfered with your ability to
perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating.

You disagreed with the finding of fitnesi:, and requested that
the PEB reconsider it and that you be accorded a formal hearing
if the finings were not modified. The presiding officer of your
PEB determined that there was no basis for changing the fincing
of fitness, and recommended that your request for a formal
hearing be denied. The President, PEB, denied your request for a
formal hearing on 2 July 2008.

The Board was not persuaded that you should have been found
unfit for duty due to the potential consequences of your
continued inability to complete a physical fitness test, or that
it would be in the interest of justice to correct your record to
show that you were found unfit for duty and placed ina
permanent limited duty status until such time as you have
completed ten years of commissioned service and qualified for
retirement as an officer. 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,

Lo vue cide

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Di r

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2009 | 07922-09

    Original file (07922-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 November 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 | CY2007 | 04043-07

    Original file (04043-07.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.On 6 November 2006, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were fit...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11886-08

    Original file (11886-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2009. The Board concluded that your belated decision to request retention in the Navy Reserve in lieu of discharge, and to undergo elective knee surgery, are insufficient to demonstrate that you were improperly found unfit for duty by the PEB, or to warrant rescinding the orders that directed your discharge from the Navy Reserve. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01971-07

    Original file (01971-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 May 2006, the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made the preliminary finding that you were fit for duty. Prior to making that finding, the PEB considered the medical board report, pertinent medical records, and a non- medical assessment which indicates, in part, that your back pain did not require you to work out of your specialty as a hospital corpsman, and that you had good potential for continued service despite the fact that you were not worldwide assignable and could not complete...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02530-10

    Original file (02530-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 January 2011. 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 | CY2008 | 09521-08

    Original file (09521-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 July 2009. Your receipt of disability ratings from the VA for numerous conditions that were not evaluated or rated by the PEB is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty, and you have not demonstrated that any of those conditions...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 02421-09

    Original file (02421-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2010. Your receipt of VA disability ratings for multiple conditions is not probative of the existence of material error or injustice in your naval record because the VA assigned those ratings without regard to the issue of your fitness for Military duty at the time of your release from active duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an...

  • 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.