Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11156-08
Original file (11156-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

JRE
Docket No. 11156-08
11 December 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.

A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 December 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 establigSh the existence of probable material
error or injustice.

The Board found that-you served on active duty in the Navy from
2 February 1999 to 19 October 2000, when you were voluntarily
discharged in accordance with your request, by reason of. a

condition, not a disability, which interfered with your
performance of duty.

In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were
unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your rank by reason of
physical disability that was incurred in or aggravated by your
naval service, the Board was unable to recommend favorable
action on your request. 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,

Ly Qed

W. DEAN PFE
Executive Divettor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07355-08

    Original file (07355-08.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. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 6 December 1988 and were found physically qualified for duty and administrative separation.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 02589-10

    Original file (02589-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 29 April 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 | 06129-09

    Original file (06129-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20376-5100 JRE Docket No. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 December 2009. 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 | 02744-08

    Original file (02744-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 January 2009. In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge, the Board was unable to recommend corrective action in your case. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 05377-09

    Original file (05377-09.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. There is no indication in the available records that the residual effects of the injuries rendered you unfit to reasonably perform the duties of your rank at the time of your discharge. 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...

  • 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 | CY2013 | NR3519 13

    Original file (NR3519 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 December 2013. 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 | 03957-08

    Original file (03957-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04901-10

    Original file (04901-10.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 March 2011. 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 naval service as of 28 October 2009. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10630-09

    Original file (10630-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 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...