Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08353-08
Original file (08353-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

JRE
Docket No. 08353-08
26 September 2008

 

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 25 September 2008. 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 found that
although your medical board concluded that your degenerative
knee condition did not exist prior to your enlistment (EPTE),
the Physical Fvaluation Board (PEB)classified that condition ass
EPTE and not service aggravated. On 14 August 1987, after being
advised of the findings of the PEB, you waived the right to
demand a formal hearing and to submit a statement in your
behalf, and you accepted the findings of the PEB. You were
discharged from the Marine Corps on 18 September 1987, in
accordance with the approved findings of the PEB. In a rating
decision dated 1 March 1989, the Veterans Administration
determined independently that your knee condition was not
“service connected”, and denied your request for disability
benefits.

In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that
your knee condition was incurred in or aggravated by your naval
service, 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,

\Bdoa 10
W. DEAN PFE
Executive D ter

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 11251-07

    Original file (11251-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 September 2008. The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 1 June 1992. 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 | CY2002 | 04334-01

    Original file (04334-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board your 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 Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of post traumatic stress disorder and major depression, which existed prior to your enlistment, and were not aggravated by your service. ...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2007 | 08902-07

    Original file (08902-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    08902-07 16 May 2008This 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 15 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,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 01381-07

    Original file (01381-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your contention that you did not play any “kind of ball” before you enlisted is contradicted by entries in your naval record and not probative of the existence of probable material error or injustice in your record. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of naval service, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 01381-07

    Original file (01381-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your contention that you did not play any “kind of ball” before you enlisted is contradicted by entries in your naval record and not probative of the existence of probable material error or injustice in your record. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that your condition was incurred in or aggravated by your brief period of naval service, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09791-07

    Original file (09791-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 September 2008. In addition, the VA may amend ratings at any time it determines there has been a significant improvement or worsening of a rated condition, and it may add ratings for new conditions that are considered secondary to a rated condition, as in your case, where you received ratings for bilateral hip conditions more than eight years after you were...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08366-00

    Original file (08366-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    TO SUPPORT HIS REQUEST THE MEMBER PRESENTED TESTIMONY AND COPIES OF HIS V.A. THE RECORD DOCUMENTS THAT THE MEMBER HAD CHRONIC LEFT SHOULDER KNEE, AND FOOT PAIN THAT LIMITED HIS ACTIVITIES DUE TO THE ABOVE DIAGNOSES. THE TDRL EVALUATION INDICATES THAT SINCE PLACEMENT ON THE TDRL THE MEMBER HAS UNDERGONE A LEFT ROTATOR CUFF REPAIR IN OCTOBER 1998 BUT CONTINUES TO HAVE CHRONIC SHOULDER PAIN.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06573-06

    Original file (06573-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100JREDocket No. 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...