DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS p
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No, 04429-09
5 March 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 25 February 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. In this regard, the Board found that the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating officials who
determined that your injuries were incurred in the line of duty
misread the Findings of the Physical Evaluation Board
Proceedings dated 12 May 2008, and erroneously awarded you
service connection for the residuals of those injuries. As
indicated in items 2 and 3 under the heading “DIAGNOSES AND
RATINGS”, the PEB found that your injuries were the result of
your own intentional misconduct or willful neglect, and
therefore not in the line of duty. The findings listed in items
lla-d under the heading “ADDITIONAL FINDINGS” pertain only to
the diagnosis of major depression, and not to the residual of
your injuries as erroneously found by the VA. In order to limit
your potential indebtedness resulting from the erroneous grant
of service connection, you should notify pertinent VA officials
of the error as scon as possible.
In view of the foregoing, and as you have not demonstrated that
you were injured in the line of duty, 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,
\by Woe
W. DEAN PFET
Executive Di
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03328-03
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 September 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. found fit for duty immediately prior to your release from active duty in the Navy, and as you have not persuaded the Board that you were, in fact, unfit for duty, it was unable to recommend any corrective action in your...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09993-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2003. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. and denied your claim for Although the Board was sympathetic to your situation, it was unable to conclude that you did not jump out a police wagon as alleged, or that your injuries were incurred in the line of duty, and not...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03466-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 April 2010. You enlisted in the Navy on 29 July 2005. 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 | 02275-07
02275-0727 May 2008This 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 8 May 2008. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,...
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 | CY2009 | 06432-09
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 30 September 2010. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08519-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 August 2002. consisted of your application, together with all material submitted 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.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 10102-06
The Board found that on 23 October 1985, the Central Physical Evaluation Board (CPEB) made preliminary findings that you were unfit for duty because of the residuals of injuries to the cervical spine that you sustained on 8 December 1984 in a motor vehicle accident, and that the disabilities were not ratable because you were injured as a result of your own misconduct. VA rating official denied your request, based on their determination that your disabilities were residual to the injuries...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11165-08
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your. 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. 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 | CY2002 | 06879-02
consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. Documentary material considered by the Board in executive 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...