Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09061-08
Original file (09061-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

JRE

Docket No. 09061-08
15 June 2009

‘

 

r
#

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 11 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 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
ansufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. In this regard, the Board did not accept
your contention to the effect that, for unspecified reasons,
your record should be corrected to show that you received a
disability rating of 30% or higher for an ear infection and
hearing loss effective 4 April 1961, rather than the 20% rating
you actually received on that date. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panel will be furnished upon request.

Tt is regretted that the circumetances 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,
ead ey aQ

fte_W. DEAN P IFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 12440-08

    Original file (12440-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19. The Board concluded that your receipt of disability compensation from the VA for a depressive disorder is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your naval record, because the VA assigned the disability rating more than thirty years after you were retired, and without regard to your condition as of the date of your retirement. Consequently,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07375-08

    Original file (07375-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2009 | 08350-09

    Original file (08350-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 December 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 | 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04787-10

    Original file (04787-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | CY2009 | 05732-09

    Original file (05732-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your - application on 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 | 07874-08

    Original file (07874-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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 | 04018-08

    Original file (04018-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 March 2009. The Board concluded that your receipt of substantial disability ratings from the VA effective the day after you were discharged from the Navy is not probative of the existence of error or injustice in your Navy record. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04071-09

    Original file (04071-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    , A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 September 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 03293-08

    Original file (03293-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ; A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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...