DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 07956-08
26 January 2009
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 15 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. In this regard, the Board concluded that
you were properly discharged with a disability rating on 20% for
a seizure disorder. Although it appears that you would have
received a disability rating of 40% had your case been referred
to the Physical Evaluation Board in 2006 or early 2007, rather
than in October 2007, you would have been transferred to the
Temporary Disability Retired List, rather than permanently
retired. Had you been transferred to the TDRL in 2006 or early
2007, your disability rating would have been lowered to 20% in
2008 and you would have been discharged with entitlement to
severance pay, as you did not have any additional seizures.
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,
Wes .
W. DEAN
Executive \p\ r
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03527-08
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 | CY2008 | 00032-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2008. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05771-08
You contend that you are statutorily entitled to a disability rating of 50% A three-member panel 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 ali 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,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05308-06
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No. 05308-06 16 July 2007 Dear
NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 08664-09
”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 | CY2009 | 00276-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2009. On 9 January 2007, you were given a diagnosis of generalized tonic clonic seizure, which was considered disqualifying for enlistment and not correctable to meet Navy Standards. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00630-07
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2008. 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 | CY2005 | 08120-05
The Board’s review was limited to your request for disability retirement, as you have not exhausted an available administrative remedy by applying to the Naval Discharge Review Board for upgrade of your discharge to honorable.A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support...
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...