DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 .
JRE
Docket No. 07805-08
3 August 2009
This is in reference t
naval record pursuant
United States Code, section 1552.
Board for Correction of Naval
BR three-member panel of the
on, considered your
Records, sitting in executive sessi
application on 25 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 idered by the Board consisted
material consi
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies.
4deration of the entire
dence submitted was
probable material
1 and conscientious cons
und that the evi
bligh the existence of
Bkter carefu
record, the Board fo
insufficient to esta
error or injustice.
The Board found that you were discharged from the Marine Corps
+ the convenience of the government due to a
on 24 June 2006 fo
ndition that was not considered a disability, but
our performance of duty but did not vender you
thorized half
unfit by reason of physical disability. You were au
separation pay in the amount of S14, 818.14, and assigned a
reentry code of RE-3P. On 14 May 2008, the Department of
veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you disability ratings of 50% for
a mental disorder, two ratings of 10% for each knee, separate
10% ratings for tinnitus and conditions of your shoulders,
lumbar spine, cervical spine, and wrists, and 0% for a scar.
The Board concluded that your receipt of disability ratings from
the VA 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 on
the date of your discharge. As you have not demonstrated that
any of the conditions rated by the VA rendered you unfit for
duty, 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,
\ ar
W. DEAN PHRIKWE
Executive rettor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 00651-09
The VA st for service connection for three other ugh you had numerous minor conditions that did jidual compensable ratings, VA rating officials he combination of those minimal disabilities ed you with an unspecified “employment arranted a combined overall rating of 10%. Ther as increased to 40% effective 2 December 1998, ive 30 August 2006. compensable disability rating on 9 March 1995 ate the existence of error or injustice in your this regard, the Board noted that the VA ing without...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 February 2011. As there is no indication in the available records that you were unfit for duty on 30 July 2009 due to the effects of any of the additional conditions rated by the VA, the Board was tunable to recommend favorable action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01189-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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. Your receipt of substantial @isability ratings from the VA is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record because...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09843-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 2009. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval recoreé 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 | 11339-08
A 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 | 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 | CY2009 | 04587-09
BR three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 March 2010. 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 | 08005-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2010. On 2 June 1999, a formal hearing panel of the PEB considered your case and assigned you a combined disability rating of 10% for conditions of your lumbar and cervical spine. 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 | 08089-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 July 2001. Effective 9 March- 1999, the VA awarded you a 20% rating for your lower back condition, 10% for your varicose veins, and 10% for a condition of your cervical spine. 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 | 01227-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2008. In addition, the VA rated three conditions at 0%, and determined that fifteen other conditions for which you requested ratings were not incurred in or aggravated by your naval service. The military departments, unlike the VA, are permitted to assign disability ratings only in those cases where a service member has been found unfit to reasonably...