DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No. 07479-08
11 May 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, in which you requested that
your record be corrected to show that you were retired by reason
of physical disability, vice discharged at the expiration of
your enlistment.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 7 May 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 noted that in
order to be separated or retired by reason of physical
disability, a service member must be unfit to reasonably perform
the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating by reason of
physical disability. In your case, you recovered from spinal
surgery and were found fit full duty prior to your separation.
That you were not permitted to reenlist because you failed to
meet applicable weight and body fat standards does not
demonstrate that you were unfit for duty. Similarly, your
receipt of disability ratings from the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) for degenerative disc disease (20%) and tinnitus
(10%) is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in
your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings without
regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty.
As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty at the
time of your discharge, 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 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,
TN pe SD fie
ROBERT D. SALMAN
Acting Executive Director
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07922-09
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 | 07375-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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 | 10767-08
oe A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 September 2009. You did not complete any Reserve drilis or active duty service after that date. 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 | 09521-08
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 | CY2008 | 05692-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navai Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2009. As noted above, you accepted the initial findings of the PEB, waived your right to a hearing, and acknowledged that you would be separated or retired by reason of physical disability. 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
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 | CY2008 | 03957-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 April 2009. 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 material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05732-09
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 | CY2008 | 07152-08
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 | 06657-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 June 2009. The Board also noted that on 17 June 2003 the VA was notified that you had been discharged from the naval service without entitlement to disability severance pay. The Board concluded that the presence of your address in documents the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provided to the Marine Corps did not relieve you of the responsibility of ensuring...