Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09701-08
Original file (09701-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

JRE
Docket No. 09701-08
2 March 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 served on active duty
for an additional twenty-four days so that you will be entitled
to benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) .

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 February 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 even
though you completed only 1 year, 11 months and 8 days of active
duty service, it appears that you met the basic eligibility
criteria for VA benefits as set out in 38 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) section 3.12a(d)1), based on your authorized
“early-out” from the Navy. A copy of that section of the CFR is
enclosed.
In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that
your early release from active duty was erroneous or unjust,
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,

Wad t
W. DEAN EINF

Executive Dilrec

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 07721-09

    Original file (07721-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    You had no military status during the period from 26 June 1979 to 19 December 1988. , The Board considered your application and all pertinent records in accordance with the provisions of SECNAV Instruction 5420.193, enclosure (1), Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (codified at 32 CFR 723), paragraph 3e. During the 1979-1989 period, you received treatment from VA health care providers for multiple conditions such as hip, back and knee pain, chronic recurrent foot pain,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05790-09

    Original file (05790-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 July 2009. The VA granted your request on a presumptive basis because your condition was diagnosed within eight years of your release from active duty. 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 | 11037-08

    Original file (11037-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    As a result of that rating action, your case was referred to the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery for review. After being advised of the options available.to you, you elected to request transfer to the Retired List of the Marine Corps Reserve with entitlement to retired pay at age 60. 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 | 03091-08

    Original file (03091-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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 | 10068-08

    Original file (10068-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 August 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 | 01826-08

    Original file (01826-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 February 2009. In this regard, the Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability due to a hearing loss or decreased visual acuity at the time of your voluntary discharge from the Navy. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03314-10

    Original file (03314-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. As you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty on 5 June 1969, or that your release from active duty on that date was improper, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the...

  • 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 | CY2005 | 02675-05

    Original file (02675-05.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sincerely, Enclosure DEPARTI~NT OF THE NAVY SECRETARY OF THE NAVY COUNCIL OF REVIEW BOARDS COMBAT-RELATED SPECIAL COMPENSATION BRANCH 201 12TH STREET SUITE 703 ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4357 iN REPLY REFER 10 1850/I CRSC 15 Mar 2005 Subj: APPROVAL OF CRSC UPON RECONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF~E~ qflUIIgIpUUIqqU~MUJP~4~ USN DOCKET NUMBER NCO4—00680 Ref: (a) 10 U.S. Code 1413a End: (1) DD Form 149 Application for Correction of Military Record 1. Your application package does not establish that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09975-08

    Original file (09975-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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