Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01980-09
Original file (01980-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

JRE
Docket No. 01980-09
25 January 2010

 

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 14 January 2010. 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.

You were released from active duty on 28 February 1989 and
transferred to the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) due
to the residual effects of a broken leg. Your condition was
reevaluated by the Physical Evaluation Board in 1994. As your
condition was no longer ratable at thirty percent or higher, and
you had been on the TDRL for five years, you were discharged
with entitlement to disability severance pay.

The Board noted that although the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) may raise or lower a veteran’s disability ratings
throughout his lifetime, ratings assigned by the military
departments are fixed as of the date of a service member's
separation or permanent retirement. The fact that the
Department of Veterans substantially increased your disability
ratings during the fifteen years following your discharge was
not considered probative of the existence of error or injustice
in your naval record, because the increases were based on
changes in the rated conditions which occurred after you were
discharged. In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that
you should have received a rating of thirty percent or higher
from the Department of the Navy in 1994, the Board was unable to
recommend corrective action in your case. Accordingly, your
application has been denied. The names and votes of the members
of the panei will be furnished upon request.

Tt 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,

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 06618-09

    Original file (06618-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 January 2010. On 21 March 1973 you were notified by the Commandant of the Marine Corps that as your disability was considered permanent and ratable at less than thirty percent, you would be discharged with entitlement to disability severance pay effective 31 March 1973. Consequentiy, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04718-99

    Original file (04718-99.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 July 2001. IN REPLY REFER TO: 1400/3 MMPR-2 13 Mar 01 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS ADVISORY OPINION IN THE CASE OF FORMER - ‘ a retired Marine indicates that he completed his he grade of probationary corporal and should have been promoted to the grade of sergeant prior to his retirement from the Marine Corps on 22...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11951-09

    Original file (11951-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.14 January 2010. The Board concluded that your receipt of a VA disability rating for migraine headaches 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 the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 00606-07

    Original file (00606-07.rtf) 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.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 Board found that you were released from active duty on 13 June 1980 and transferred to the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06977-01

    Original file (06977-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” The Board noted that it is the function of an MEB, which is composed entirely of physicians, to report on the state of health of the service member who is the subject of the MEB, and to recommend referral of the member to the PEB in appropriate cases. In reference to the question of why Petitioner's cardiac and pulmonary conditions found not unfitting at the time of his initial PEB adjudication and placement on the TDRL, reference Petitioner's original 14 February 1992 Medical Evaluation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089279C070403

    Original file (2003089279C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s military records were not available to the Board. Although documents associated with the applicant’s 1991 Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) were not available to the Board, the separation document provided by the applicant in support of her request indicates that she was honorably discharged on 15 October 1991 by reason of physical disability. He concluded by stating that the “degree of stress associated with her current employment and in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009835

    Original file (20060009835.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 10 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060009835 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to have his rank reinstated to specialist/pay grade E-4 and his disability rating upgraded based on his head injury and current disabilities. The TDRL examination shows that it was suggested that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004690

    Original file (20130004690.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the Soldier meets the following criteria, the Soldier will be removed from the TDRL, permanently retired for physical disability, and entitled to receive disability retired pay: (a) the Soldier is unfit; (b) the disability causing the Soldier’s name to be placed on the TDRL has become permanent; and (c) the disability is rated at 30 percent or more under the VASRD, or the Soldier has at least 20 years of active Federal service. A Soldier will be removed from the TDRL and separated with...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9508215C070209

    Original file (9508215C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    The board determined that he was physically unfit, recommended a disability rating of 10 percent, and separation with severance pay. Title 10, United States Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rated at least 30 percent. RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected: a. by showing that the action separating the individual concerned from active...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04590

    Original file (BC-2010-04590.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04590 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 20 percent disability rating he received for his diabetes be increased to 40 percent and he be medically retired with a 40 percent disability rating. The USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the service member’s condition at the time...