DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 ‘NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE
Docket No. 11165-0608.
19 October 2009
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the
United States Code, section 1552 in which you requested that the
Board correct your record to show that you sustained a knee
injury in 1962 and head injuries in 1973, which were the direct
result of combat training, and that you sustained a hearing loss
while service in combat in 1968.
A three-member panel-of the Board for Correction of Naval -
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 September 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 connection, the Board concluded
that your contention that the aforementioned injuries occurred
is insufficient to warrant the granting of your request for
correction of your record. The Board noted that on 2 September
1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you
disability ratings for residuals of a knee injury that occurred
in 1973, and hearing loss that was noted in 1973. The records
available to the Board do not indicate that you received a VA
rating for headaches.
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,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 03279-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 March 2005. 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. 2 Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 06064-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 October 2003. The fact that the VA has given you a disability for the residuals of your knee injury is not probative of error or injustice in your military record, because the VA awards disability ratings without regard to the issue of fitness for military duty. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 00290-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 2010. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that you were not physically qualified for release from active duty on 2 October 2008, or that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability on 27 May 2009, when you were discharged by reason of physical fitness assessment failure, the Board was unable to recommend any corrective action in...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11455-10
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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06103-06
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 February 2007. 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 | 08695-05
08695-05 6 November 2006This is in reference to your application for correction of your navalrecord 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, consideredyour application on 26 October 2006. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted insupport thereof, yournaval recordandapplicable statutes,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 January 2011. As noted above, you were found fit for duty by the PEB, and you accepted that finding, which suggests that you felt that you were fit for duty at that time. 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 | CY2009 | 02771-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 May 2010. 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. 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 | CY2001 | 04234-00
a 37 year old male with over 14 years of military service who wes placed on the TDRL in September 4986 with the diagnosis of (1) Degenerative Joint Disease of the Left Knee, ratable under VA Code 5Q03 at 20%, and (2) Degenerative Joint Disesse of the Left Wrist, ratable under YA Code 5003 at 10Z,for a combined rating of 28% which is 302. e menber's most recent evaluation was in April 1991 and based on this the Record Review Panel ‘found the menber permanently unfit with the same ratings, The...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04963-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 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...